Spurgeon? Jessa's Poor Baby Part 2

[formergothardite]

Cassielfsw actually explained the racism part of your husband's discriminatory hiring practices several pages back. You said your husband would pick someone named something like Joe over someone with a name he viewed as "foreign" because he is assuming the "American" names have great communication skills while the others probably don't. 

[batuityma]

You are bringing up national origin now, but earlier you were talking about Asians if I recall correctly.  I do agree that discriminating against people based on their name can be racist, sexist, xenophobia, you name it.  I do not agree, based on the sum total of your posts on this issue, that the situation you described had "nothing to do with racism".  I did not go back to look at the order of the posts, so perhaps some people jumped the gun and called it racism before you confirmed that it was indeed racism, but that doesn't change the fact that it was about racism.  I have paid a great deal of attention to everything you have said.  I SIMPLY DON'T AGREE WITH YOUR EXPLANATIONS AND JUSTIFICATIONS AND EXCUSES THAT CLAIM THIS WAS NOT RACISM.  When someone says something blatantly racist, it really, SEVERELY does not matter if they "did not intend to be racist".  Period.

Further, in your post, you stated that it was WRONG, but he did it anyway and you seemed fine with that because there is no perfect solution and the racist solution was more convenient for your husband than any other option.  THAT'S RACIST and you seemed to be justifying it by saying "no perfect solution, so I choose racism".  

I am really appreciating your tone as opposed to others in this thread. I am willing to look at these things you are pointing out but I still have a hard time accepting some of it. I did bring up Asians as a hypothetical example because  there are many people of Asian descent that field. I was only using that as one example of a "foreign looking" name just like I just used the hypothetical example of the white person with a "foreign looking" name. 

I also think you and other people are insinuating things that aren't true. You said I "seemed" fine with it. that was an assumption. I wasn't fine with it. And I wasn't "justifying" anything. I was explaining the situation which was he didn't know what else to do. That doesn't make it right. I never said I was ok with it.

[formergothardite]

He did know what to do, though, at least according to your first post on the subject. He knew that his actions where wrong and he was discriminating, but he continued to do it because it was a hassle to have non-discriminatory hiring practices. 

[twinmama]

I've heard from friends who have had babies and have a significant other that if the mother is breastfeeding the partner can take over diaper duty more often so that mom doesn't have to be doing the feeding and the changing all the time. Im a single mom, but if I ever have another one this sounds like a good idea to me 

Most moms I know have dad change the baby's diaper, then hand to mom for feeding. At least at night. I think we played each baby man to man. They woke up, my husband went to start the bottles warming while I changed baby A, then while he changed baby B I got the bottles, then we met up in the bedroom and each fed a kid. Man, I barely remember those times... haha

[Whoosh]

I am really appreciating your tone as opposed to others in this thread. I am willing to look at these things you are pointing out but I still have a hard time accepting some of it. I did bring up Asians as a hypothetical example because  there are many people of Asian descent that field. I was only using that as one example of a "foreign looking" just like I just used the hypothetical example of the white person with a "foreign sounding" name. 

I also think you and other people are insinuating things that aren't true. You said I "seemed" fine with it. that was an assumption. I wasn't fine with it. And I wasn't "justifying" anything. I was explaining the situation which was he didn't know what else to do. That doesn't make it right. I never said I was ok with it.

I hear what you are saying.  If everything you are claiming now is indeed true, then I would suggest you work on expressing your thoughts fully and clearly.  People will respond and react to what you actually SAY, not what you meant to say.  That won't change.  

In terms of your claim that your husband was actually discriminating against white individuals he assumed were foreigners rather than people he assumed were foreigners that were of a different race, I guess we could wipe the slate clean and discuss the inappropriateness and unacceptability of DISCRIMINATION BASED ON NATIONAL ORIGIN.  I don't know if anyone really wants that at this point.

[batuityma]

Racism - the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.

Paraphrased: Racism is basically discriminating against someone based on the thought that the race in the position of power is superior. 

I see your statement that I bolded as racism, because your husband assumed, by someone's name, that they may not speak English and that he chose more "English" (White) sounding names over the names who didn't sound White. 

You mentioned discrimination based on immigration status. I would file that under racism. 

Edited to add that I haven't slept in three days, so anyone else, please feel free to help me out here. I'm exhausted. 

I knew that bringing up the race vs country of origin thing would sound like splitting hairs. I still don't see how the example I gave about the two white people classifies as racism but I'm willing to drop it. It's semantics. I does detract from the main point. nevermind.

I hear what you are saying.  If everything you are claiming now is indeed true, then I would suggest you work on expressing your thoughts fully and clearly.  People will respond and react to what you actually SAY, not what you meant to say.  That won't change.  

In terms of your claim that your husband was actually discriminating against white individuals he assumed were foreigners rather than people he assumed were foreigners that were of a different race, I guess we could wipe the slate clean and discuss the inappropriateness and unacceptability of DISCRIMINATION BASED ON NATIONAL ORIGIN.  I don't know if anyone really wants that at this point.

Agreed on the bolded. I'm backing off on that

[sawasdee]

Please explain. I'm seriously asking. In the example i just gave about the two white people how is that about race. I am open to listening if this really is where I am being ignorant.

Racism isn't always about colour - just ask the Jews. The example you used could be called racist against Slavs.

I feel very sorry that you are being, to some degree, dogpiled, as I feel that your heart is in the right place. Unfortunately, you also seem to be tone deaf to how racism works. May I suggest that you follow up some of the suggestions made earlier in this thread - particularly the short video uploaded by lascuba on the 5 things you should know?

I'm truly glad that you and your husband are trying to address conscious and unconscious racism - as that is how I read your posts.

[Whoosh]

I want to second what sawasdee just said.  As I admitted earlier, I totally have plenty of my own biases and flaws etc.  I have appreciated your posts and thought over time batuityma and I do believe you are not ill-intentioned.  These issues are tough to deal with.  

[EmCatlyn]

Not sure what your point is here.  Affirmative action, whether it is still in place or not, IS discrimination.  In fact, another term for it is "positive discrimination".  While it has always been controversial, the purpose of affirmative action was to combat the harms of plain old standard discrimination.  

A racist is a person who believes one race is better than another.

In other words, affirmative action is based on the fact that, although one race is not "better" than another, racists believe one race is better and therefore discriminate against people of other races.  The purpose of affirmative action (while it is controversial) is to place everyone back on a level playing field since NO ONE RACE IS BETTER THAN ANOTHER.  So, while the implementation hasn't been ideal and it is controversial, theoretically and ideologically, that's not racist.

I agree that no one race is better than another, but I disagree with your definition of "racism."  I think of "racism" as making judgments or decisions based on stereotypes or assumptions about race. These assumptions may not always imply superiority or inferiority (though they often do), but they are still racist. (An example of a value-neutral but racist assumption would center on assumptions about what food people like /dislike.  There is nothing wrong or inferior about liking watermelon and fried chicken, but the generalization that all African Americans do is racist.) I like this definition from my Google search:

the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.

 

[batuityma]

Racism isn't always about colour - just ask the Jews. The example you used could be called racist against Slavs.

I feel very sorry that you are being, to some degree, dogpiled, as I feel that your heart is in the right place. Unfortunately, you also seem to be tone deaf to how racism works. May I suggest that you follow up some of the suggestions made earlier in this thread - particularly the short video uploaded by lascuba on the 5 things you should know?

I'm truly glad that you and your husband are trying to address conscious and unconscious racism - as that is how I read your posts.

Ok I am admitting that I am not well versed in the definition of racism. The Jewish example makes sense to me. I get it. Thank you. As I've said I'm retracting the "not about rascism" part.

[Whoosh]

I agree that no one race is better than another, but I disagree with your definition of "racism."  I think of "racism" as making judgments or decisions based on stereotypes or assumptions about race. These assumptions may not always imply superiority or inferiority (though they often do), but they are still racist. (An example of a neutral but racist assumption would center on assumptions about what food people like /dislike.  There is nothing wrong or inferior about liking watermelon and fried chicken, but the generalization that all African Americans do is racist.  I like this definition from my Google search:

 

I did get my definition from the dictionary.  I guess my definition differs from your definition in that it doesn't recognize that the inferior/superior aspect is always in play.  Personally, I tend to think that the way the term is used it does usually include the idea that inferiority/superiority is in play, but I do appreciate and agree with the distinction you are making.

[VelociRapture]

Please explain. I'm seriously asking. In the example i just gave about the two white people how is that about race. I am open to listening if this really is where I am being ignorant.

Maybe this will help a bit.

I am of Irish descent. My family came here during the 1800's - before, during, and after the Great Hunger. During that time, many other Irish people were coming to the states as well and Americans viewed them as a threat to job security and national security. All over the country, signs stating "Irish Need Not Apply" popped up, Irish people were attacked, and they were called horribly racist things in the media.

It doesn't matter that the Irish were white and so were the people discriminating against them - those signs and acts were still racist because it assumed things about the Irish that weren't true and the people doing the discriminating felt they were superior to the Irish race. 

The same can be said of Italians, Jewish people, and many others who are classified as white, but still face (or once faced) discrimination and racism.

Your husband may have been discriminating based off of a European sounding name, but that doesn't necessarily mean it wasn't still racist. And he may not have meant to act in that manner or enjoyed doing so - but like I learned in mandatory company sexual harassment training, it's not the intent that matters. It's the impact.

[Cartmann99]

I think the example of a white person eliminating the resumes/CVs of candidates based on "foreign sounding" names or their national origin is better described as bigotry. Bigotry can also include racism, sexism, religious intolerance, etc... It's a more inclusive* term for describing  the actions of someone who is exhibiting prejudices towards other groups of people.

*Its strange to me that I'm using the term "inclusive" when discussing prejudice. 

[iweartanktops]

Respectfully snipped

Your husband may have been discriminating based off of a European sounding name, but that doesn't necessarily mean it wasn't still racist. And he may not have meant to act in that manner or enjoyed doing so - but like I learned in mandatory company sexual harassment training,  it's not the intent that matters. It's the impact. 

Bold is mine and I just wanted to emphasize! 

[Fundie Bunny]

To be exact, the correct term for discrimination because of nationality is xenophobia. I don't get why it isn't more used in the states

[EmCatlyn]

I did get my definition from the dictionary.  I guess my definition differs from your definition in that it doesn't recognize that the inferior/superior aspect is always in play.  Personally, I tend to think that the way the term is used it does usually include the idea that inferiority/superiority is in play, but I do appreciate and agree with the distinction you are making.

I wasn't suggesting that your definition was uninformed or not from a dictionary. Sorry if it sounded that way.  There are many ways of defining racism.  I was saying that for me the better definition focuses on generalizations about qualities of a race. This is because I see the "superiority/inferiority" issue rising from those generalizations.

Again, I was just trying to suggest another perspective which I find more useful--not deny the accuracy/value of your point.

[Whoosh]

I wasn't suggesting that your definition was uninformed or not from a dictionary. Sorry if it sounded that way.  There are many ways of defining racism.  I was saying that for me the better definition focuses on generalizations about qualities of a race. This is because I see the "superiority/inferiority" issue rising from those generalizations.

Again, I was just trying to suggest another perspective which I find more useful--not deny the accuracy/value of your point.

Your comment is much appreciated!  After a few minutes thought, I do have to say I like your definition better as well.  I didn't mean to be defensive and snippy.  I think it is nap time!

[batuityma]

Bold is mine and I just wanted to emphasize! 

Totally agree. If I had known my post would explode into such a huge debate I would have written it differently. There are things I still feeI I want to clarify but I have to step away to tend my family. (my absence will probably be appreciated by some I'm sure)

[lascuba]

This will be my last comment on this topic, but do you all see how batuityma is all, "thank you for being so polite" to people now and yet she still hasn't learned anything and keeps doubling down and making excuses for her husband? Explain to me again how politeness is more effective?

[formergothardite]

This will be my last comment on this topic, but do you all see how batuityma is all, "thank you for being so polite" to people now and yet she still hasn't learned anything and keeps doubling down and making excuses for her husband? Explain to me again how politeness is more effective?

I do see it. She still hasn't really admitted that her husband behaved in a racist/xenophobic way. And it really doesn't matter how she worded her original post, when it comes down to it her husband discriminated against people because it just wasn't convenient for him to use non-discriminatory practices. There is no excuse for how he behaved, not even the one that he didn't know what he was doing was wrong. He knew it was wrong and he continued to do it because it would be a hassle to do the right thing. I think it makes it worse that he knew he was doing the wrong thing and continued to do it for selfish reasons. 

[Maggie Mae]

This will be my last comment on this topic, but do you all see how batuityma is all, "thank you for being so polite" to people now and yet she still hasn't learned anything and keeps doubling down and making excuses for her husband? Explain to me again how politeness is more effective?

 

 

How do you know she hasn't?

 

I think a lot of people forget that change is gradual. Shouting at people, telling them to educate themselves, calling them names, and being unpleasant isn't going to change minds.

 

[Cartmann99]

Maybe this will help a bit.

I am of Irish descent. My family came here during the 1800's - before, during, and after the Great Hunger. During that time, many other Irish people were coming to the states as well and Americans viewed them as a threat to job security and national security. All over the country, signs stating "Irish Need Not Apply" popped up, Irish people were attacked, and they were called horribly racist things in the media.

It doesn't matter that the Irish were white and so were the people discriminating against them - those signs and acts were still racist because it assumed things about the Irish that weren't true and the people doing the discriminating felt they were superior to the Irish race. 

The same can be said of Italians, Jewish people, and many others who are classified as white, but still face (or once faced) discrimination and racism.

Your husband may have been discriminating based off of a European sounding name, but that doesn't necessarily mean it wasn't still racist. And he may not have meant to act in that manner or enjoyed doing so - but like I learned in mandatory company sexual harassment training, it's not the intent that matters. It's the impact.

I'm also of Irish descent, only my ancestors on one side got here sooner then yours which makes me superior to you. 

Just so there's no misunderstanding, I'm joking with @VelociRapture. Since my Mother's family got here in the 1600s, I enjoy telling people that I'm the product of illegal immigration just to watch their heads explode.

 

[JillyO]

To be exact, the correct term for discrimination because of nationality is xenophobia. I don't get why it isn't more used in the states

It's because the U.S. has much more of an issue with racism against black people who have been in the country for hundreds of years, whereas many European countries tend to have more problems with xenophobia in the face of immigration from Northern Africa, the Middle East, Turkey, etc. Obviously, the issue is not as clear-cut as all that - but those are the big tendencies. Xenophobia and racism are, of course, strongly interlinked, and I personally don't think it's possible to really distinguish one from the other. Quick example: Irish and Italian Catholics didn't used to be considered "white" in the U.S. - and there was a huge problem with racism against them, as VelociRapture explained above. This should make it obvious that race is purely a social construct; hence why the whole "but they have white skin as well, so I can't possibly be racist by discriminating against them" doesn't work. I'm just rambling at this point. Hope anybody was able to follow at all...

[iweartanktops]

I'm of Irish descent (on my mom's side) as well. 

[halcionne]

 

Of all your posts this one really shows your true colors the most. These are the thing you have freely admitted :

• You make automatic assumptions about people you don’t know
• You’re “not patient enough to be kind to people” that haven’t had the same life experiences as you
• You automatically “know” how discussions are going to go with certain people you’ve never met

I think that pretty much describes the definition of someone who is prejudiced.

That’s fine. We all have prejudices. And you are certainly under no obligation to “hold anyone’s hand and be a gentle educator” about race merely because you were born with a certain skin color. It’s your right to decide how you want to approach racism.

However, I’m trying to imagine if I had that attitude toward my life as the mother of someone with Down syndrome.  

I am beyond exhausted with seeing discrimination against people with intellectual disabilities every single fucking day. It is the same thing over and over. There are always people who will be intentionally hateful but the more insidious examples come from people who "mean well" but make completely ignorant and offensive comments without realizing they are completely ignorant and offensive. It would be so much easier (and probably feel briefly satisfying) if I just told people they are ignorant fucks. But that isn't in the best interest of my daughter.

I don't WANT to have to be a "gentle educator" about this issue.  It is exhausting when it is the same shit over and over. But I'm going to put my best effort forth to get my point across in way that is most likely to be heard. Even if I feel like I'm hitting my head against the wall because I have to do it again and again and again.

I'm not going to post some angry response on facebook to all the people commenting on the (18 millionth) "inspiring" article about some high school kid who asked a girl with Down syndrome to the prom. "Oh how patronizing wonderful it is that this boy wanted to make himself feel better about himself this girl feel disillusioned that he has a romantic interest in her included!"

Yeah, I'd much rather have my daughter invited to the prom out of pity than be the mother whose 26 year old son was tackled to the ground and suffocated to death by security guards in a movie theater because he literally didn't know he had to leave when the movie was over (his aide had left him to go pull the car around to the front).

So I'm not going to go off and tell well meaning people what I really think because it is just going to alienate them and make me seem like a sanctimonious bitch. But if I get the opportunity to point out how certain seemingly innocent comments are actually really dehumanizing, I'm going to try to be as polite and non-confrontational as possible so that they don't "claim they're being attacked". In my experience that just work better.  For me.

I don't want to speak for, or talk over, lascuba, so I hesitated to reply to this. But your little bullet points up there can't go unanswered, 

Someone tell the racist fuck to fuck off with her nonsensical tl:dr posts.

Now THAT was rude. 

 

and I'm going to take this ^ post from lascuba as my cue that it's okay to jump back in.

Those bullet points are a pathetic attempt to turn the tables and accuse lascuba of the very thing you and your husband did. Nice victim blaming and yet more derailing and obtuseness.

I can see that you're trying in some of your posts, including your first one. But you have failed. Repeatedly. I hope that you and JenniferJuniper --yeah, I'm pissed off and naming names now; I see you downvoting lascuba and iweartanktops6 *but not me*. What the actual fuck -- and anyone else reading this thread will learn something and do better in the future.