Blacks Should Not Act As Monkeys?

Status
Not open for further replies.
AmishRakeFight said:
This is rather disturbing, in my opinion. So it's unacceptable for the black children to have a role as a monkey in the play, yet it's perfectly fine for the white children to have the role? Is the role not good enough for a black person? It seems to me that the mother is racist in her own right, as she has made it perfectly clear that, in her paradigm, black people should not be allowed to be portrayed as animals, but white people should instead take the role that black people are too good for. I don't think that the children being apes is racist. I think that if the children didn't get a role at all, it would have been racist. I think that if only black children were in the play, it would be racist. But a racially mixed cast where the child, regardless of if he's black or white, was not allowed to play the role of the hunter, just sounds like life to me, not racism. I'm sure for every black child in the play that wanted to be the hunter, there were two other white children who were equally disappointed when they didn't get the lead role. After all, there's only one spot.

Does any of that seem racist to you?

Mrs Rees is pointing out that, in a racist society,

Redarmy, you must understand that every society is racist to some degree. Even the phrase "racist society" is fairly redundant, because every society, from the xenophobic French to the melting pot of America to the rugged towns of China, is racist, even if just a little bit.

it's wrong to force black children into playing these roles

But if white children are "forced" into playing the role, its fine? Are white people the default race in America or something? And last time I checked, when entering a elementary/middle school play, children sign up to be IN the play, not to be a certain role. The play director chooses who gets what part. The black children weren't "forced" into being in the play any more than the white children were "forced" into being in it. They signed up, they got their parts. End of story.

it serves to reinforce racist perceptions

Do you find it odd that, with 6,000,000,000 people alive on this rock we call home, at least 1 of those 6,000,000,000 might have a "racist perception" of white people being monkeys? Or of Latin people being monkeys? Or of monkeys being monkeys? I mean, come on, should every race complain because they have been chosen to portray an animal? Should the play direct bring in live monkeys to do the part that the humans are too good for? When does it stop?

And, in the real world, not everyone is trying to "keep the blacks down." But the majority of black people that I know still are stuck in an old mentality that the man is trying to keep them down, and that every gesture is one meant to slight them. Don't get me wrong, I love black people, and I've got several black friends. But there's always the select few who haven't changed, who don't want to change, and who will refuse-to-change themselves out of society's good graces.

AmishRakeFight
 
Last edited:
imaplanck. said:
We have offered british muslims equal rights and citizenship yet they have a tremendous hate towards whites(white athiests in particular). Why would the bleeding heart liberals not account for this as racism?

oh?
do expand
 
samcdkey said:
Are we all educated people here? We do know that scientifically there is no such thing as race, right?
No that is not right race by its definition exists among humans. The old fallacies such as breed doesn't exist scientifically.
 
samcdkey said:
We do know that scientifically there is no such thing as race, right?
If "we do know that scientifically there is no such thing as race"?

That would mean there is no such thing as racism, right?
 
D'ster said:
If "we do know that scientifically there is no such thing as race"?

That would mean there is no such thing as racism, right?
Unfortunately no. We still have people that hate on other races. Racism might be funny to some righties but I wonder how much laughter there would be if we could drop the white racists off in central Congo. I would happily drive the truck to drop them off.
 
samcdkey said:
We do know that scientifically there is no such thing as race, right?
Genji said:
We still have people that hate on other races
One of these things is not like the other, one of these things just does'nt belong.

Pick one.

Sorry, but some of you start to sound so alike.
 
Last edited:
D'ster said:
One of these things is not like the other, one of these things just does'nt belong.

Pick one.
Could it be that the Master Aryan made an error!? :eek: In fact it was I that said people still hate on other races.
 
i think that it would be more racist to tell the kids that only whites are allowed to play monkeys. i could understand if she made all and only the black kids monkeys(and some of them were good enough actors to have main parts instead), but this is just a mother getting pissed of because her son didnt get the lead in to play and being so black supremicist that she thinks her child deserves a better part simply because of his race.
 
D'ster said:
One of these things is not like the other, one of these things just does'nt belong.

Pick one.

Race is an arbitrary label applied to people from different populations

Definition: Webster's
People who are believed to belong to the same genetic stock

However scientifically speaking there are not enough genetic differences between people to segregate them into races

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race

P.S. Try Google or wikipedia intead of nitpicking
 
D'ster said:
If "we do know that scientifically there is no such thing as race"?

That would mean there is no such thing as racism, right?


There is racism

Racism:An act of discrimination based on an ideology of racial superiority
 
Genji said:
Could it be that the Master Aryan made an error!? :eek: In fact it was I that said people still hate on other races.


Ya he is the master of cut selectively and paste indiscriminately
 
samcdkey said:
However scientifically speaking there are not enough genetic differences between people to segregate them into races
Who has the authority to say how much difference warrants a different racial clasification? There is no yard stick because no other species has a similar classification. One can argue that Wikipedia article may have been written by a PC influenced scientist. some races seperated 60000 years ago, modern humans are only thought to be 150000 years old. It is certainly debatable that any genetic difference that resulting from land seperation for so long should be defined as race.
If you want to use google Im sure every one of us could find unstifled recent scientific material that needs to use the term race to make sense.
 
imaplanck. said:
Who has the authority to say how much difference warrants a different racial clasification? There is no yard stick because no other species has a similar classification. One can argue that Wikipedia article may have been written by a PC influenced scientist. some races seperated 60000 years ago, modern humans are only thought to be 150000 years old. It is certainly debatable that any genetic difference that resulting from land seperation for so long should be defined as race.
If you want to use google Im sure every one of us could find unstifled recent scientific material that needs to use the term race to make sense.


Oh Puh-lease!!!

http://www.leidenuniv.nl/fsw/iuaes/08-race.htm

http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/19980909040042data_trunc_sys.shtml

http://raceandgenomics.ssrc.org/Lewontin/
 
Last edited:
AmishRakeFight said:
Redarmy, you must understand that every society is racist to some degree. Even the phrase "racist society" is fairly redundant, because every society, from the xenophobic French to the melting pot of America to the rugged towns of China, is racist, even if just a little bit.
Granted - therefore educated people, and especially educators, should be aware of the consequences of their actions.

But if white children are "forced" into playing the role, its fine?
Yes, because white people aren't generally regarded as 'monkeys' by racist non-whites.

Are white people the default race in America or something?
I've no idea. I'm British, it's a British news story but, in any case, I think the issues involved are international.

And last time I checked, when entering a elementary/middle school play, children sign up to be IN the play, not to be a certain role. The play director chooses who gets what part.
Then they should choose more carefully.

The black children weren't "forced" into being in the play
No, but one of them was forced into playing an inappropriate role against his will (I accept that he was probably too young to realise that it was inappropriate, and probably had normal, selfish, child-like reasons for wanting a different part. Nevertheless, he was herded into playing an inappropriate role by an adult who should have known better, as were the other black children).

Do you find it odd that, with 6,000,000,000 people alive on this rock we call home, at least 1 of those 6,000,000,000 might have a "racist perception" of white people being monkeys? Or of Latin people being monkeys? Or of monkeys being monkeys? I mean, come on, should every race complain because they have been chosen to portray an animal?
I've never heard of white people, Latinos, Orientals, etc. being compared with monkeys in a derogatory way. I've frequently heard of black people being referred to and portrayed in this fashion, eg bananas being thrown at football matches whenever a black player gets the ball, to accompanying chimpanzee noises. It's a well-known stereotype, which the teacher should have been careful to avoid.

the majority of black people that I know still are stuck in an old mentality that the man is trying to keep them down, and that every gesture is one meant to slight them
Do you know any wealthy, educated black people? Do they see society in this way? Even assuming for a moment that what you say is true, do you not wonder why the majority of blacks that you know harbour such a grudge? To be honest, though, I'd say this is more a characteristic of the poor and the uneducated than of black people. I know plenty of poor, white people with similar views and attitudes. I also know plenty who are at the opposite end of the spectrum, with many more dotted in between these two points. It takes all sorts, I suppose.[/QUOTE]

To sum up? The teacher should have been more sensitive to the issues. Did he/she honestly not consider the possibility that black parents might object to their children being given a role with such strong racist associations? As for everyone else: try putting yourself in the place of the black parent before you comment further (naturally, this doesn't apply to the unapologetic racists amongst you, who should just die painfully).
 
samcdkey said:
Oh Puh-lease!!!

http://www.leidenuniv.nl/fsw/iuaes/08-race.htm
Much of the biological variation among populations involves modest degrees of variation in the frequency of shared traits. Human populations have at times been isolated, but have never genetically diverged enough to produce any barriers to interbreeding.
All dogs, horses, cats etc..... can interbreed too, I guess all dogs are the same?
samcdkey said:
http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/19980909040042data_trunc_sys.shtml
Templeton analyzed genetic data from mitochondrial DNA, a form inherited only from the maternal side; Y chromosome DNA, paternally inherited DNA; and nuclear DNA, inherited from both sexes. His results showed that 85 percent of genetic variation in the human DNA was due to individual variation. A mere 15 percent could be traced to what could be interpreted as "racial" differences.
15% out of 100% is quite a difference to me.
samcdkey said:
http://raceandgenomics.ssrc.org/Lewontin/
Despite the differences in amount of genetic variation within local populations, the finding that on the average 85% of all human genetic variation is within local populations has been a remarkably consistent result of independent studies carried out over twenty-five years using data from both proteins and DNA.
15% is alot of difference.

Human DNA is about 98.4% the same as chimpanzee DNA. This means that all the differences between humans and chimps is contained in only 1.6% of our DNA. To put this another way, chimps are 98.4% the same as humans. Why is this important? Because the race-deniers try to tell us that all humans are virtually the same except for some itsy bitsy minor little genetic things. Even the most race-deniers should be able to see how that itsy bitsy 1.6% difference between humans and chimps results in a world of difference between the two creatures.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top