fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #4565 ]

[ SECRET POST #4565 ]

⌈ Secret Post #4565 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

[Lion King (2019)]

__________________________________________________

04.

[Cassandra Clare]

__________________________________________________

05.

[The Witcher]

__________________________________________________

06.

[The Liar Princess and the Blind Prince]

__________________________________________________

07.

[Dark]

__________________________________________________

08.

[That Guy With Glasses/Channel Awesome/ #ChangeTheChannel]

__________________________________________________

09.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 56 secrets from Secret Submission Post #654.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

The Sami were the object of a lot of curious research on skull size and shape that would allegedly prove their lesser intelligence compared to the non-Sami Scandinavians. "Slavophobia" has its own Wikipedia page. A brief look at the article on anti-Irish sentiment seems to suggest that the Irish faced something comparable.

All these groups are white, and as soon as the nineteenth century rolled along with its theories of human races, racial science was used as an explanation for their "inferiority".

yes but this is still white on white bs. one part of the same 'race' ie white people attacking another.

Xenophobia needs to be taken more seriously but that does not mean the problem is the same as with white people and other races.

You have a very limited understanding of how the term race is used. It's not exclusively tied to skin colour.

I am aware of that. But I stand by the white groups that have been described in these threads cannot be victims of racism. Xenophobia is the term appropriate for the issues already described.

I am also more aware than you might think but feel free to judge without questioning yourself.

Well as long as you believe in it. Doesn't make it true, but you do you.

♥

"white" is not a simple term. It's a loaded category that's largely socially constructed and can change significantly over time and place. "you can't be racist against white people" is a true statement in America but it's not necessarily the best lens to use to understand ethnic and racial relationships in general, and the way that for example the Nazis treated Jews and Slavic groups definitely could reasonably be called racist in a meaningful sense.

It is a true statement everywhere.

The statement elsewhere is 'xenophobic'. It should be taken more seriously and isn't. Not my fault on that.

It is for the Jewish community to decide where they identify. As far as I have seen most do not identify as white given their ancestry but again, no business of mine there.

And yeah, no. The treatment by the Nazis of Eastern European populations was horrendous but it still falls under modern terms of xenophobia.

It absolutely does not. The Nazis understood Germanic and Slavic peoples as distinct races in a genetic, scientific, ideological sense and determined their treatment of them on that basis, not simply on the basis of dislike of them as foreign. They thought they were superior, as a race, to Slavs, as a race. Please explain what specific characteristics Nazi race science and race ideology would have needed to be properly called 'racist'. Because I sure as hell can't see it.

To have a different colour of skin to those they oppressed. For their oppressed people to have descended from non-white people. That is what racism is deemed today.

White on white. European on European is deemed xenophobia.

It does sound brutal but it is reality. People need to take xenophobia more seriously. I get it. My people have been downtrodden for centuries and if we could use the work 'racism' we might get a hearing but it isn't and we can't and don't.

Just because Nazi scientists didn't know an atom from their arsehole doesn't create racism.

So, if your definition of racism is that it's based upon skin color, then obviously by definition you can't be racist against white people. And that is generally how it works in contemporary America (and probably Britain and Australia or whatever).

The problem is that it's not a good definition of racism *in general*. It's the most useful rule of thumb in contemporary society, but it's not adequate as a general definition. Because, for example, we know that whiteness is a malleable social category that has been redefined in ways that haven't had anything to do with skin tone, and we can look at things like the treatment of mixed-race people and the "one-drop rule" as examples where skin color is not the fundamental basis of racist ideologies.

I hear you but that is covered surely in the many report/papers/threads/books ect that black people/poc have created on 'white privilege' and where and how that impacts those who may pass?

My dad is mixed race. He passes as white at times and others not. So, it is a close to home issue. I get where you are coming from though.

I'm definitely not arguing against the concepts of white privilege or "passing"! But I think white privilege is a concept that exists in specific societies, and is not something that's present in every single example of racism.

And passing is something that primarily reflects the way that people's perceptions of someone's identity affect the way that they treat that person. Like... being able to pass as X doesn't change the actual racial "category" that society sorts you into, if that makes sense?

I think most victims of racism would argue that white privilege is very real and very dangerous. It is why only certain people get profiled at airports for example. I walked into Australia without question with my British passport and white face. I saw the racism happen around me as others were profiled.

Of course. My gran can pass as white. My dad can't. They share they same Aboriginal black ancestor. Still, there are issues and fears my family face others don;t purely on their race and their panic over whether they can pass or not. It is a fucked up world

one part of the same 'race' ie white people attacking another.

No, that's exactly the point: once science could justify it, the discrimination of these groups was supported by the argument that they were racially inferior. "White" is a concept that has only existed in Europe for maybe the last fifty years. Before that, it was us and the heathens, but that sure didn't stop us from discriminating each other because tainted blood/worse bred/genetically inferior for centuries.

I don't like throwing my qualifications around but I am a historian and that is just not true. It has been here for centuries. Or certainly in Britain it has. IT fueled the racist missions of the Empire.

If you are a historian then you sure missed a big chunk of your education if you think racism is based on skin colour alone.

I am aware of where it deviates but I am also aware of where other factors and bigotries come into play. Such as xenophobia. If you would like to point me in the direction of other things, I am happy to investigate and further my knowledge.

The thing that you don't understand: racism and xenophobia are not mutually exclusive. They can exist at the same time. And historically, white people being, yes, racist against other "white" ethnic groups is a fact.

Ugh. Let me try to re-phrase:

The difference between white and non-white skin colour is undeniably a thing, but until fairly recently, the existence of non-white people was a theoretical for almost all Europeans; they lived in Africa and China and India and were heathens and possibly cannibals.

The common presence of non-white people and the necessity of acknowledging ourselves as racially marked (white) in difference to the others around us is not something Europe has been doing for a very long time. The fact that we were all white didn't stop us from using biology as an argument against whatever out-group we wanted to push down.

Arendt talks a lot in Origins of Totalitarianism about the idea that the conceptual structure of scientific racism only really develops in the 18th/19th century as an intellectual response to the experiences of colonialism and imperialism (looking at people like Gobineau), and that it's fundamentally a different way of conceptualizing identity than pre-modern prejudice and xenophobia. So I think it's true that racism develops *in response* to Europeans encountering and living with people who are markedly difference in appearance (and also, exploiting them and treating them as inferiors).

But that doesn't mean that the actual *content* of race categories consists primarily of skin tone, or that you can't take that structure and apply it to people with pale skin. And in fact, this is what people went and did.

I respect a lot of your arguments here. I think a lot of things changed with the so called 'scramble for Africa'. From my readings racism is old as heck but perhaps it was limited to those reading the things I have read. Not a concept the majority looked into ect. Certainly something I am now looking into given our convos.

Ah yes, good old Social Darwinism.
"Scientists" in the field of Phrenology also tried very hard to prove that criminals more often than not shared traits with those "lesser" races (such as Irish people etc.).

My ancestors were Irish, they immigrated here during the potato famine. There were many, many places that would not employ them at all just because they were Irish. There were also many places that would not allow them to live there due to being Irish. They faced exactly the same sort of social discrimination that blacks did despite having white skin.

Yup. Swedish race biologist Herman Lundborg also added Finns to the "inferior" list, which... yeah just try to claim they're non-white. All this added to the scandal when it came out he made the Finnish-Sami cleaner at his institution pregnant.

But nooo, Sami are only white NOW because there were programs to "outbreed" their skin color by making sure they married white Scandinavians! ...yes, I saw someone argue that in all seriousness.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #4565 ]

Re: Unpopular opinions

Re: Unpopular opinions

Re: Unpopular opinions

Re: Unpopular opinions

Re: Unpopular opinions

Re: Unpopular opinions

Re: Unpopular opinions

Re: Unpopular opinions

Re: Unpopular opinions

Re: Unpopular opinions

Re: Unpopular opinions

Re: Unpopular opinions

Re: Unpopular opinions

Re: Unpopular opinions

Re: Unpopular opinions

Re: Unpopular opinions

Re: Unpopular opinions

Re: Unpopular opinions

Re: Unpopular opinions

Re: Unpopular opinions

Re: Unpopular opinions

Re: Unpopular opinions

Re: Unpopular opinions

Re: Unpopular opinions

Re: Unpopular opinions