en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/758950 Comments by gjs5028 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/stories-for-uplift__trashed/#IDComment70906465 The first video is really cool that someone would do that, but for some reason I just feel skeptical of his motives. Maybe I'm just cynical, but all I can picture is that he must think he is really great. I'm sure he thinks himself to be very righteous, and even though he deserves to feel good about himself, it bothers me that people like this often have such a high opinion of themselves. On the other hand I see the value in his actions regardless of what his motive is, and I see how terrific his charity truly is. Even though it is a little tough to get past what I perceive to be overt righteousness, I definitely admire what he has done, and I hope more people follow his example in contributing extraordinary acts of kindness toward others. Tue, 27 Apr 2010 19:08:17 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/stories-for-uplift__trashed/#IDComment70906465 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/how-am-i-not-a-racist__trashed/#IDComment70017209 This is an interesting point. I definitely see what your saying, but I guess maybe if you start to think this way, you just need to remind yourself of the truth. Think about how the only reason you are in a position to help is because you were born into a position that allows you to get an education. You are able to make money at a greater rate than these poor people, because of where you live and who your parents are. You are lucky, not chosen. If you can see this, then hopefully you will not see yourself as the great, chosen one who deserves all he gets and others are simply lucky enough to receive what they get. The truth is, in a purely economic sense, the average Penn State student probably is worth more than a starving person is Haiti, because others have invested more in you, but it is simply by luck that we have received that investment. Keep that in mind, and hopefully you can keep things in perspective. Fri, 23 Apr 2010 23:08:35 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/how-am-i-not-a-racist__trashed/#IDComment70017209 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/south-park-off-the-hook__trashed/#IDComment70014421 Well first it is important to point out that the episode of South Park in question does not actually make fun of Muhammad. It makes fun of the fact that every other religious figure is fair game, but Muhammad is not. This was referenced in an earlier episode as well, which was supposed to parallel the bombing that occurred in the Netherlands after a cartoon was meant to depict the prophet Muhammad. So what makes the episode so edgy is that Matt Stone and Trey Parker are actually attacking the means by which they are being threatened. So I just thought it was important to point out that they are not attacking Muhammad himself, but instead they are attacking how touchy the extremists are who are willing to kill because of a joke in a cartoon. Having said this, they have openly made fun of other religious figureheads and in fact, in the episode at hand, they show Buddha snorting lines of cocaine, and make a reference that Jesus is addicted to online pornography. While I am sure that many people were potentially offended by this, and many more would have been offended if they were aware of the episode, but none of these groups have threatened Matt Stone and Trey Parker. Considering our discussion earlier in the week, I would be curious to hear what Sam has to say about this fact. It is a very interesting point that figureheads of other religions can be made fun of, while Muhammad has become off limits. I personally think that it is ridiculous that we cannot mock Muhammad, but we can make fun of others. I guess most people would argue that it is really inappropriate to make fun of any of them, but one cannot deny that it is at least more taboo to talk about Muhammad than other religious leaders. Especially when it is at risk of a bombing. I actually feel a little proud that Matt Stone and Trey Parker didn’t back down, and went through with the episode. I do often believe that people shouldn’t always act in ways that are controversial, but I don’t think people should ever back down because of a threat. So in conclusion, I think that Trey Parker and Matt Stone did the right thing by sticking to their guns. I also believe that exposing extremists to these things may be important, especially in the context of an episode of South Park, which makes fun of everyone. Humor is a beautiful thing. It teaches others how to laugh at oneself, and when one can do that, then one won’t lash out at others anymore. I think shows like South Park may actually save lives. Fri, 23 Apr 2010 22:47:53 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/south-park-off-the-hook__trashed/#IDComment70014421 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/what-about-the-men__trashed/#IDComment68402307 Guys are just as shaped as women by socialization, and we feel the need to conform, but it simply shows itself in different ways. Men do not have to look sexy like women do, but men are still mocked if they over dress or if they dress gothic or something. We are also subject to other social standards like having to be strong all the time, and needing to be providers. This has made stay at home dads a taboo institution, and inversely it has hurt women in the job market. Men may not have some of the same issues and disadvantages as women, but having the advantages has a down side in that if one is not as strong as one should be or a provider like society says we should be, then we are shunned in society and don't have respect in society. I am not saying I don't like the perks, but the perks do come with a down side. So that is my answer, men face social constraints and pressures, but they are very different from the ones women face. Fri, 16 Apr 2010 17:42:08 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/what-about-the-men__trashed/#IDComment68402307 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/the-tyranny-of-radical-muslims__trashed/#IDComment68393709 I haven't looked up any polling information on the subject but I'm sure most Muslims are moderates, and I hope that most people realize this. However, I do think that some people of Arab descent would still likely sympathize with the cause of the extremist, not because of the religious aspect, but instead because of the injustices done to the Arab people. As Sam stated in class, America is exploiting their land, and it is Muslims and people of Arab descent who are likely aware of this fact. I'm not really sure what I am trying to say, maybe I'm just trying to point out that it is not all about religion. It is a political war, that is often justified through religion, but it really isn't a religious war. People connect Islam to the war, but it is also about geo-political boundries, resources, culture, and various other things that are really behind the war and the mistrust of our groups. Fri, 16 Apr 2010 16:30:41 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/the-tyranny-of-radical-muslims__trashed/#IDComment68393709 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/christian-invaders-the-turnaround__trashed/#IDComment68386005 I can honestly say that I have shared Sam’s perspective on this prior to this lecture. I was actually a little disappointed that this was what his wife was referring to when she said that this class was going to be very difficult to take, because it really shouldn’t be. I agree with Sam entirely in that I understand why insurgents act as they do. Like Sam I do not condone it, but I certainly do think they are not crazy, evil-doers. They are in fact acting rationally. One must understand that terrorism is these people’s only real way of combating U.S. invasion, and exploitation of their resources. There is never any acceptable time to target civilians, but if one backs another into a corner, one must expect that the other will thrash out with any means available to defend itself. To answer Sam's question, I personally would not pick up arms unless their were extenuating circumstances like a close relative being killed, but once again I do understand why some would. Another point worth mentioning is that many people think that the terrorists started the war. While they may have started the physical fighting, it was the U.S. who provoked them by essentially going in to their countries, striking deals with a few wealthy individuals, and then basically deciding all of the terms of production for these countries. It is like going into someone’s house and telling them they have to sell their possessions to you and at the price that you have decided. This would probably piss you off. It may even piss you of to the point where you pick up a gun and say no. So I just wanted to point out that America is not this altruistic entity that only does right, and countries like Afghanistan and Iraq are not inherently evil. I certainly do not think that America is all bad either or that these middle eastern nations are entirely benevolent, I just wish that people could see the situation as it is. The truth is, both sides have committed some heinous and unfair acts. We must atone for ours, not ignore them. Lastly, we as a people need to push our politicians to atone for the sins committed in the middle east. There is no reason that the struggle with them should have ever gone this far. However, because of the terrorist attacks, it will be more difficult than ever to change our policy because it will appear that we are giving into terrorist demands. This is something that simply cannot be done, because it may signal that terrorism is an acceptable means for other groups, and that it is effective. This does not change the fact though that we should do the right thing and give these nations autonomy over their oil fields. Other issues are more complex like what to do with Israel, but the issue of oil is pretty straight-forward. It is the least the U.S. can do. More than likely the price of oil would go up, but I think we have got this commodity at a premium price for long enough. Fri, 16 Apr 2010 15:28:29 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/christian-invaders-the-turnaround__trashed/#IDComment68386005 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/what-might-be-the-second-step__trashed/#IDComment66723695 Well he did mention the fair trade chocolate that I think is the least someone can do. I don't necessarily think you have to avoid all other brands entirely that use these tactics to turn profits, but if people make an active effort to avoid these companies and they lose market share, then they may change their ways. The only way one can ever really change the policies of a major corporation is to hit them in their wallets, because turning a profit is their only real goal. If we attempt to boycott their products, and they lose a large enough portion of their market share, then they may change their policy. I don't agree that thinking about it is enough though. I sort of believe in utilitarianism in this regard, and if ones thoughts do not lead to action then I believe they are worthless. So one should always find some way to act, rather than just think about the morality of the issue. Fri, 9 Apr 2010 04:24:16 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/what-might-be-the-second-step__trashed/#IDComment66723695 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/i-really-want-to-know-also__trashed/#IDComment66689546 What this class has done for me is really remind me of things I once knew. I was taught the tolerance thing in grade school, but I have been exposed to a lot of racism and negative stereotypes since. Living in my white world I don't see the statistics of how minorities are treated, and in the past I have blamed minorities entirely for their positions as opposed to considering the lack of opportunities that are provided to them. As a result, I will admit that I have had racist ignorant thoughts. What Sam has done for me is reminded me of why certain groups are at the bottom. It has made me think of how if I grew up less privileged, what path would I be on? I have not changed who I am entirely or had some huge revelation that has moved and touched me to the point of tears, but I certainly think I will leave the class as a more enlightened person then when I went in. Unless you happen to know everything or are simply to thick to see the facts right in front of you, I would find it hard to believe that you cannot take something away from this class. Fri, 9 Apr 2010 00:51:41 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/i-really-want-to-know-also__trashed/#IDComment66689546 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/nothing-about-the-census-is-easy__trashed/#IDComment65680493 I really don't see the big deal with saying the word negro. I am aware that it is an outdated term and is not politically correct, but it is also not a racial slur. It was simply the technical term for black people of the past. Furthermore, to not use the term negro in the census would lead to an inaccurate calculation of people, thus making the entire process less significant. The census also helps to appropriate social programs to groups that need them, which are more than often minority groups. So the very people who are offended by such means of collecting information are the people who are likely to gain from the research. So while I understand how the word is not the most appropriate, politically correct term, sometimes you need to take function over form in order to obtain real results, and this is one of those times. Sat, 3 Apr 2010 01:48:00 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/nothing-about-the-census-is-easy__trashed/#IDComment65680493 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/what-about-multiracial-people__trashed/#IDComment65677567 I would say that you are white. I certainly cannot say how much your life is affected by your Hispanic heritage, but I think I have a similar predicament even though I am most definitely white. I have a strong Italian heritage, and I am aware that Italian is still considered to be white, but the culture sets one aside from normal American culture, just like I am sure having Hispanic heritage does for you. However, my Italian heritage really only comes out in my house, not in public. But the point I am trying to reach is that because of your skin color, people treat you like a white person, and that should be the primary criteria in making this distinction. People do not know you DNA markers of race, so as long as you appear white, you will be treated that way. I say this because how one looks is often contingent upon how one is treated, especially if one does not know another intimately. I believe that this interaction is what shapes our opinions and beliefs about race, so this is what makes us who we are. So based on your skin color and the interactions you have likely had as a result of your skin color, I believe that you would most likely identify with a white person as far as your experiences and your ideas and values. Furthermore, as far as I could tell, I did not detect any accent that would hint any origin other than American, so this would also help in pegging you as not only white, but also as a native born American, which also puts you into the majority group. I would imagine you have faced little to know discrimination in your life, which sets you apart from other minority groups who have experiences with racism or discrimination. I have noticed that many people discriminate more against accent than against race, so just having an American accent helps to dissuade any discrimination, and enforce that you are another white American that blends into the minority. In conclusion, I would argue that if you had to choose a category of race then you would be placed into the white category. I know that you identify with a Hispanic heritage, but if it is anything like my Italian heritage, it only really comes up at home. I think this is an important distinction because how one is treated outside of ones comfort zone is really what shapes ones impression on race. If you appeared Hispanic then you would likely have experiences that would peg you as somebody of minority status, and this would let you know how you should identify. So to reiterate my point, how one is treated will determine one beliefs and values, and this will determine how you identify racially. Sat, 3 Apr 2010 01:24:50 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/what-about-multiracial-people__trashed/#IDComment65677567 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/how-can-we-ever-win__trashed/#IDComment65556360 I understand what she is saying. I am white, but I feel the same way in that it seems that we are damned if we do and damned if we don't. Because no matter how we feel about race, it is how we are perceived that is really important and because of different stages, people will perceive actions differently depending on what stage they are in. Furthermore, who came up with these stages? I think there is some legitimacy to them, but I certainly don't think that they are this cut and dry. It is one of the things I hate most about social sciences, in that they all dry to quantify things that really can't be put into numbers. I remember thinking the same thing in psychology class when we learned the stages of morality, and I was told that one course of action is always immoral, or that society's rules are king. I just think that just because some professor says it, does not mean it is true. Fri, 2 Apr 2010 14:12:35 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/how-can-we-ever-win__trashed/#IDComment65556360 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/if-men-could-menstruate__trashed/#IDComment64053789 I am a little baffled by people's response to Sam's lecture because I have never really been very grossed out by the idea of menstruation. It is certainly not the most attractive bodily function, but I think people should be able to be adult about such things. Having said that though, I think Sam needs to be more mature. His point of menstruation was sort of irrelevant, and he knew that people would react this way. Furthermore, when I took his Soc 001 in my Freshman year, he did the same thing. So my point is, even though we as a group should be able to handle such a topic, why does Sam feel the need to bring up irrelevant topics that stir up discomfort and controversy. In my opinion it is pretty immature. It is what 13 year old children do when they are trying to get their parents attention. They act out. I'm not sure if I'm even complaining, because sometimes it makes class more interesting, but other times it just seems pathetic. Thu, 25 Mar 2010 16:05:39 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/if-men-could-menstruate__trashed/#IDComment64053789 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/what-are-all-of-you-thinking-about-asians__trashed/#IDComment64052354 I think that Asians are part of the minority, but they are also different in several ways in that Asians are often viewed as the model minority. We often think about white people as receiving vast advantages for being part of the majority, but I think that Asian people often share in that privilege. I have never heard a single stereotype about Asians that portrays them as lazy or stupid. In fact, they usually get even more credit than white people. So while they are a minority, they in many ways avoid minority treatment. I'm sure there are problems they face, like simply feeling different and left out as a result of their outward appearance, but in other aspects of life they are probably level with whites, or perhaps even higher. Thu, 25 Mar 2010 15:54:25 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/what-are-all-of-you-thinking-about-asians__trashed/#IDComment64052354 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/is-this-just-a-few-bad-apples__trashed/#IDComment63523675 As a democrat, I love what the Tea Party movement is doing, because their radical slogans and protests have only hurt their chances of achieving their overall objective. I am a political science major, and one of the things I have noticed during my period of education is that nothing repulses moderates more than radicalism, so I think that as long as the Tea Party continues to conduct itself in these crass ways, it will actually be counter productive to its goals. It is quite clear that the majority of these protesters really have no idea what they are talking about, because in most cases they are protesting against policies that will benefit them. Moreover, their overall demeanor does not generally suggest that they are calm, rational, and educated people. I do see that some of the members of the movement are both educated and arguing to protect their interests, but these people are wealthy educated people, who are exploiting fears from the poor who are scared of having their guns taken away, and believe that any and all socialist programs are inherently evil. I understand that oppositional ways of thinking are not necessarily bad, and I believe that opposition to the healthcare reform bill can be legitimate, but these protesters almost never discuss the legitimate downsides to the bill. Instead they put up signs with Obama sporting a Hitler mustache, and shout about the dangers of socialism. If they simply discussed the real issues like the efficiency of bureaucracy, the potential lack of doctors and infrastructure to support more patients, the growing deficit, and the potential negative impact of the costs on large corporations, then they would gain more respect in the public eye. I may not agree with many republicans, but there are many that I respect, and understand. The Tea Party is just a group of fanatics who hate based on ignorance. Once again, I have heard their leaders speak, and some of them seem competent and intelligent, but the ugly face of its populace, who do little more than chant McCarthyism rhetoric and try to instill fear into the general populace, vastly undermine their movement. Ignorant people on the left did the same thing to Bush, and it always angers me to see such things. To compare Hitler to someone like Bush or Obama not only unjustly slanders them, but it also trivializes the abhorrent actions of Hitler and the Nazi movement. As for the threats of potential force, I think these signs should be banned as unlawful, and should not be permitted under laws that protect peaceful protest. I really hope that all of these protesters rethink their demeanor in the future. As of this week, this blog may be a moot point after the passage of the healthcare bill. This was the largest point being protested, so the bills passage may take a lot of the wind out of the movement’s sails, but if it doesn’t I hope they continue with a new sense of humility for everyone’s sake. Mon, 22 Mar 2010 18:54:39 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/is-this-just-a-few-bad-apples__trashed/#IDComment63523675 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/prom-or-no-prom-just-dont-let-the-queer-students-dance-together__trashed/#IDComment63074062 This is a pretty bad one. I really don’t know how people get away with this stuff, and I really hope the ACLU really gives it to them. I really feel like things like this should not happen in civilized societies, which leads me to believe that Mississippi is not civilized. The comment by her teacher at the end is especially revealing of their culture when “she was told she had to remember where she was”. It is certainly no secret that many people foster negative feelings about homosexuals, but to openly discriminate like this is very foreign to me. I have heard plenty of discriminatory remarks behind closed doors, and I have even cracked a joke or two of my own in my less mature days, but to see such discrimination institutionalized and so open in this day and age is disgusting. I am not excusing the actions of my friends or of myself, but the difference in magnitude is hugely significant, and the impact is far, far worse when a school system not only condones, but acts on behalf of bigotry and ignorance. Another aspect that bothered me in this story is that the students are mad at Constance McMillen instead of the school board who banned the event. I would think that in many places, people would be up in arms protesting the school’s decision, not rallying behind them, and blaming the oppressed minority. I know that at that age, even the most intelligent students are often still immature and unenlightened, so it really doesn’t come as a shock to me that the students blame Constance, but it is still very sad and unfortunate that many people must wait so long before they learn right and wrong. Lastly I want to talk about how trivial the school is being. It almost reminds me of Plato’s Apology where Socrates is on trial and all of the accusers sort of know they are wrong, so they pretty much say that he can either confess and apologize and receive a slap on the wrist, or he can take the death penalty. They know they are wrong, so they created hoops that she must jump through in order to attend like not arriving with her girlfriend and not wearing a tuxedo. They tried to offer her and themselves a way out, but with them still retaining their beliefs. However, like Socrates, she did not take the deal, and retained her dignity by making them deal out a punishment that was not befitting of the crime. I honestly applaud her efforts, and I think that it is people like her who help push equality movements forward. With out people who are willing to make unpopular decisions, who are willing to sacrifice themselves for their convictions, these movements would never progress. Sat, 20 Mar 2010 00:19:54 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/prom-or-no-prom-just-dont-let-the-queer-students-dance-together__trashed/#IDComment63074062 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/what-to-do-about-white-guilt__trashed/#IDComment63066860 My issue with "white guilt" is really an argument of semantics. I do not believe that the word guilt really defines the emotion that I feel over the various disparities between white people and people of color. How I feel is that I see something unfair, and I think it should be fixed. I see that I have been given some beneficial treatment, but I do not feel guilty about receiving it because I think anyone and everyone takes every advantage they can to get ahead in life. I think the appropriate term for this feeling of wanting to impart some form of reparations is really more of racial justice. It goes along with the American ideal of equality. We believe that all are created equal in America, but when we find out they are not, then we simply want to fix it because of our sense of fairness. Fri, 19 Mar 2010 23:16:06 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/what-to-do-about-white-guilt__trashed/#IDComment63066860 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/what-happens-to-multiracial-people__trashed/#IDComment62893503 I think with modernization and increasing technologies in transportation, races are becoming more and more intertwined and mixed, and how one identifies is really often up to them. However, if one is half white and half black like president Obama, then I think ones identity is more contingent upon third person perspective. What I mean is that how one is viewed will generally shape how one thinks, and this will be a large factor in the race that they identify with. Obama is generally considered to be black even though he is half white, and I think that this is primarily because when you see him he looks black. When we see people we do not know their genealogy or ethnic background and this often affects how we treat them. So my point is that when one is between races, then one can choose an identity to some degree, but when ones outward appearance suggests a certain race, then the individual may not have a choice in his or her racial identification. Fri, 19 Mar 2010 04:17:58 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/what-happens-to-multiracial-people__trashed/#IDComment62893503 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/fired-for-a-scarf__trashed/#IDComment59972093 First I want to say that what has happened to her is terrible, and why anyone would send death threats is beyond me. If she was hired and was informed of a certain dress code, and conducted herself in accordance with that dress code, then it seems that their decision to arbitrarily change that dress code is a racist and discriminatory measure. However, I think that this is only terrible because they hired her under these pretenses and then removed them. The fact is, it is no secret that Abercrombie and Fitch is marketed toward white people, just like how FUBU is marketed toward black people. Because this is the fashion industry, and appearance matters more than in other markets, it makes sense to me that these companies care about who is selling their clothes. Furthermore, I know that models' looks can be overseen because of the nature of the industry. So I guess what I'm saying is that if they want to hire white people exclusively for their retail stores, then they should be able to because of the nature of their business, but if they are going to hire all people, then they should treat all of them fairly and create stringent rules that are not arbitrarily changed for racist purposes. Sat, 6 Mar 2010 02:05:46 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/fired-for-a-scarf__trashed/#IDComment59972093 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/are-whites-the-only-people-willing-to-humiliate-themselves__trashed/#IDComment59969994 I don't really think that only white people are willing to embarrass themselves like the question is stated, but I do think that television is segregated. Black people have their own exclusive shows that make them look crazy like I love New York, and Flava of Love, but they are populated almost entirely by black people. So it's not a matter of black people not being represented, but it is an issue of them being represented separately from white people. They still probably are unequally represented, and I know that they are unequally represented on television as a whole, but an important aspect that is not discussed here is that there are black shows and there are white shows. Very rarely do television shows target both, and this shows that there is a major discrepancy between popular black and white cultures that needs to be addressed. Sat, 6 Mar 2010 01:44:47 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/are-whites-the-only-people-willing-to-humiliate-themselves__trashed/#IDComment59969994 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/whats-with-the-theme-parties__trashed/#IDComment59968307 I’m a little confused by the assertion that theme parties usually target black people. I have been to plenty of theme parties, and I have never been to one that targets black people, and I have only been to one that could even be considered racist or prejudiced, but it targeted Native Americans. Here is a short list of the parties I have attended: CEO and business hoe, beach parties, golf pro and tennis hoe, heroes and villains, movie stars, and cowboys and Indians (Obviously this is the one that could be considered offensive or prejudice). Quite honestly I cannot attest to whether these parties are primarily white, but I still cannot see how they target the black community. I do see that most of the parties I attend are primarily white, but the truth is that most of my friends are white, so I don’t see a wide enough spectrum to really know. In my opinion, if these parties are offensive to anyone it would seem to be to women in that these parties usually objectify women. At these parties, women are typically expected to dress very sexy and scantily, while men usually try to be funny with their costumes. This is the only aspect of theme parties that I believe systematically and consistently discriminates against anyone, but this is clearly not exclusive to just theme parties, because women usually try to dress up and look sexy at most parties and social events. Overall, I have always had a lot of fun at theme parties because they make normal parties more exciting and add a creative aspect to the parties as well. I have never even noticed any racial aspect to them with the exception of the cowboys and Indians party. I’m sure there are parties that are offensive, but I think they are the exceptions, not the rule. Most theme parties are usually either holiday related or related to something in the media or popular culture. As others have noted, I believe that these offensive parties must exist since I don’t believe that this person randomly made them up, but I don’t think that she is aware of the other themed parties that really make up the majority of such parties. So in conclusion, I really don’t think that themed parties are really prejudice as a general rule. As a white person, I apologize for my race if we have really created the impression that these themed parties target minorities, and more specifically black people, but the people who hold and attend such parties are not representative of me or my friends. I hope this response helps to explain what I see in regard to the question posed, and I am sorry that I haven’t seen the problem that is being described. Maybe I am just living in my own little white world, but truly I have never seen any theme parties that target black people. Sat, 6 Mar 2010 01:27:25 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/whats-with-the-theme-parties__trashed/#IDComment59968307