(cache) Is Thunderf00t Racist? : atheismplus

.	.
/r/AtheistHavens	/r/AtheistParents
/r/BlackAtheism	/r/atheismindia
/r/feministFAQ	/r/socialjustice101
/r/Gaytheists	/r/GodlessWomen
/r/SRSSkeptic	/r/SRSFeminism
/r/WhereAretheFeminists	/r/YoungAtheists
/r/atheismplusmemes

Is Thunderf00t Racist? (youtube.com)

ZenPawn7 が 2 日前投稿

全ての 16 コメント

[–]ratjea 8 ポイント9 ポイント10 ポイント 1 日前 (0子コメント)

固定リンク

[–]sunizel 3 ポイント4 ポイント5 ポイント 1 日前 (0子コメント)

固定リンク

[+]TED_666 スコアが基準値未満のコメント-7 ポイント-6 ポイント-5 ポイント 1 日前 (13子コメント)

固定リンク

[–]mrsamsa 4 ポイント5 ポイント6 ポイント 1 日前 (11子コメント)

[–][deleted] 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 日前 (10子コメント)

[–]mrsamsa 2 ポイント3 ポイント4 ポイント 1 日前 (8子コメント)

[–][deleted] 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 日前 (7子コメント)

[–]mrsamsa 4 ポイント5 ポイント6 ポイント 1 日前 (6子コメント)

Well, the only data we have on what Native Americans think of the topic is the one discussed here, which found nearly 70% found the name to be racist. So we have evidence of a clearly majority there, unless you have other surveys done with Native Americans finding an opposite conclusion.

But let's assume, for the moment, that you're right and that there's only a minority of Native Americans against it (a group that represents 30%, as you seem happy to concede). So what? This isn't a democracy.

As a comparison, there was a significant number of women who were anti-suffrage and opposed the vote. Does that mean disallowing women to vote is not sexist because some women were okay with it? Of course not.

The point is that the facts we currently have are that the issue was initially sparked, and re-sparked over the years, by a number of major Native American organisations. We also know that a hugely significant number (if not the outright majority) of Native Americans think it's racist. We can surely agree that "Redskin" as a term is itself a slur and that the cheesy stereotyped mascot is pretty offensive.

...So where's the argument against that? Saying that there are some Native Americans who don't find it offensive doesn't suddenly mean it stops being offensive. And you can't just dismiss all the Native American voices by saying it's a "white people concern".

[–][deleted] 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 日前 (5子コメント)

which found nearly 70% found the name to be racist

Cool. Though, in the survey you linked to rate is actually 65.6%. But there are some problems with that survey, see below.

So we have evidence of a clearly majority there, unless you have other surveys done with Native Americans finding an opposite conclusion.

There is this study:

http://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/downloads/political_communication/naes/2004_03_redskins_09-24_pr.pdf

But apparently it excluded Alaska. Though, the study you linked to doesn't actually note its methodology or sampling.

Also, this part of the study is problematic:

The survey was conducted based on similar work done on the Cleveland Indians Chief Wahoo mascot, when analysts found mainstream research agendas systematically mis-identified Native Americans to benefit dominant ideologies that American Indians supported the mascot and team name

There needs to be more transparency on how the excluded people from the survey based on this methodology because there is the very real problem that they excluded people based on their answers not necessarily their ethnicity.

But let's assume, for the moment, that you're right and that there's only a minority of Native Americans against it (a group that represents 30%, as you seem happy to concede). So what? This isn't a democracy.

This isn't a democracy? What do you mean? Democracies are all about preventing minority views from being forced onto the majority.

We also know that a hugely significant number (if not the outright majority) of Native Americans think it's racist. We can surely agree that "Redskin" as a term is itself a slur and that the cheesy stereotyped mascot is pretty offensive.

On a subreddit devoted to skepticism I wouldn't make such bold claims.

...So where's the argument against that? Saying that there are some Native Americans who don't find it offensive doesn't suddenly mean it stops being offensive. And you can't just dismiss all the Native American voices by saying it's a "white people concern".

If a single man finds the term "rape culture" offensive will feminists stop using the term? If one man finds the term inoffensive does that mean its inoffensive?

[–]mrsamsa 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 1 日前 (4子コメント)

Cool. Though, in the survey you linked to rate is actually 65.6%. But there are some problems with that survey, see below.

67% (A.K.A "nearly 70%").

There is this study: http://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/downloads/political_communication/naes/2004_03_redskins_09-24_pr.pdf[1] But apparently it excluded Alaska. Though, the study you linked to doesn't actually note its methodology or sampling.

That study is over 10 years old and the exclusion of Alaska is a bit of problem, given that it's a state with one of the largest Native American populations in it. Your study also doesn't identify tribal associations.

There needs to be more transparency on how the excluded people from the survey based on this methodology because there is the very real problem that they excluded people based on their answers not necessarily their ethnicity.

It explains that the problem with previous studies was their failure to confirm their Native American status. They fixed this by confirming their Native American status. It wasn't based on their answers.

This isn't a democracy? What do you mean? Democracies are all about preventing minority views from being forced onto the majority.

Exactly, it's not a democracy. The majority view is irrelevant and not necessarily right just because it's the majority. That's the argument - even if only 30% had a problem with it, that's significant enough for us to reconsider its usage.

On a subreddit devoted to skepticism I wouldn't make such bold claims.

Nothing bold there. We've already agreed on the significant number that think it's racist (as I've accepted 30% for the sake of argument), and I don't think anyone can honestly argue against the latter part of my statement.

If a single man finds the term "rape culture" offensive will feminists stop using the term? If one man finds the term inoffensive does that mean its inoffensive?

Scientific terms don't get accepted or rejected based on the feelings of single people. To reject something like rape culture you'd need evidence.

I don't really understand your attempt at a comparison though. The point is that the term and mascot have a demonstrable harm on a significant number of people (who already belong to an oppressed group). Why kick them in the teeth whilst they're already down? Why tell them that their feelings don't matter and dismiss their concerns as "white people concerns" just because you personally disagree with them?

[–][deleted] -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント 1 日前 (3子コメント)

Exactly, it's not a democracy. The majority view is irrelevant and not necessarily right just because it's the majority. That's the argument - even if only 30% had a problem with it, that's significant enough for us to reconsider its usage.

This is a very easy argument to pick apart.

Nothing bold there. We've already agreed on the significant number that think it's racist (as I've accepted 30% for the sake of argument), and I don't think anyone can honestly argue against the latter part of my statement.

Your boldness was drawing conclusions about truth based on a single study.

Scientific terms don't get accepted or rejected based on the feelings of single people. To reject something like rape culture you'd need evidence.

"Rape culture" is not a scientific term. Please don't embarrass yourself by making that statement. Its a widely discredited idea that many, many people find extremely offensive.

The point is that the term and mascot have a demonstrable harm on a significant number of people

Then demonstrate it...

Why kick them in the teeth whilst they're already down?

Because a lot of them do not care about the term at all.

Why tell them that their feelings don't matter and dismiss their concerns as "white people concerns" just because you personally disagree with them?

You seem perfectly happy to dismiss the concerns of men.

[–]mrsamsa 3 ポイント4 ポイント5 ポイント 1 日前 (2子コメント)

This is a very easy argument to pick apart.

...Then why don't you do so?

Your boldness was drawing conclusions about truth based on a single study.

I didn't reach any conclusions from that study. My arguments explicitly stated that I'm ignoring the results of that study and using your figures.

"Rape culture" is not a scientific term. Please don't embarrass yourself by making that statement. Its a widely discredited idea that many, many people find extremely offensive.

It's undeniably a scientific concept which has no real dissenting opinion in the literature. I'm open to contrary opinions though, just link some peer-reviewed articles discussing the problems with it and I'll see how they stack up against the arguments for it.

Then demonstrate it...

It's already demonstrated. You've accepted the 30% figure that find it offensive. We also have the vast amount of literature on the problems with stereotypes but, I mean, you're not actually arguing that stereotypes aren't harmful, right?

Because a lot of them do not care about the term at all.

Why would that matter? Does the harm caused to many of them suddenly not matter because others aren't affected?

Again, I'll draw parallels to the suffragette movement. Many women at that time argued that there wasn't a problem with them not being allowed to vote. Does that mean the voices of the women who were unhappy with the situation should be ignored?

You seem perfectly happy to dismiss the concerns of men.

Oh no, you misunderstand. I dismissed the concerns of ignorant assholes, not men.

If you want a fuller explanation, it makes no sense to think that the concept of rape culture is "offensive" to men. Nothing in the concept of rape culture has anything to do with men. It's like men being offended by the theory of tectonic plates or the process of osmosis. How could it be "offensive" to men to have a concept which said that societal attitudes towards rape affect individual beliefs and the incidences of rape? It's not like it paints men as rapists or the problem.

このスレッドの続きを見る

[–]autowikibot 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 日前 (0子コメント)

Section 19. Native American support for the name of article Washington Redskins name controversy:

In May 2013, the Redskins' website reported the opinions of a local fan, Stephen D. Dodson, who claimed to be a chief and "full-blooded American Inuit originally from the Aleutian Tribes of Alaska." He said that not only was "Redskins" not offensive to him and his "whole family", but it was a "term of endearment" that Indians "on the reservation [...] would call each other". On June 5, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell wrote a letter to Congress, which in part pointed to "recent remarks from Chief Steven Dodson, an American Inuit chief" to indicate support for the nickname among Native Americans.

^Interesting: ^Washington ^Redskins ^trademark ^dispute ^| ^Washington ^Redskins ^Original ^Americans ^Foundation ^| ^Amanda ^Blackhorse ^| ^Peter ^Jo ^Messitte

^Parent ^commenter ^can ^toggle ^NSFW ^or ^delete^. ^Will ^also ^delete ^on ^comment ^score ^of ^-1 ^or ^less. ^| ^FAQs ^| ^Mods ^| ^Magic ^Words

[–]Tachyx 4 ポイント5 ポイント6 ポイント 1 日前 (0子コメント)

ユーザインターフェイス用言語	(*) 未完成翻訳ボランティアに立候補する

π Rendered by PID 5262 on app-43 at 2014-12-16 15:12:14.412033+00:00 running c46faaa country code: JP.

atheismplus

/r/AtheismPlus supports /r/blackladies! Details here.

Welcome to /r/atheismplus

Rules

Posting Guidelines

Resources

Related and Recommended Subreddits

調停者