Race ain't over.

[alexandraerin]

I booted someone off my discussion community (and subsequently blocked a comment they tried to leave on a story) for saying, in a tangential discussion, that the word problems of racism left in the United States are "unscrupulous" minorities who play on white liberal guilt.

I've been told this joker went and whined elsewhere on the internet that I'm such a controlling bitch that anyone who dares to suggest there's been any progress regarding race relations will be subjected to a profanity-laced tirade and then banned. No, dude. Just you. And if you really had just suggested that there's been progress, I would agree. But I'd follow up that agreement with the observation that you don't win a long race by stopping after a really good sprint. In fact, to stretch that metaphor a little further, if you're not in great condition for running in the first place, that sprint can stop you in your tracks. Like when people exercise who aren't used to it, and they make a big show of cranking the treadmill up or putting a lot of weights on the bar and they make one big showy push and then go, "Whoo! That's enough of that." and then limp away, trying to pretend like they accomplished something huge.

The evidence this guy pointed to for the lack of actual, non-unscrupulous-minority-directed racism in America was the election of Barack Obama. Which, yay. Milestone. Achievement. Possibly a turning point, but it's far too early to say how big of one... especially when a lot of the folks who'd need to be turning the corner are actually stopping before they get there, limping towards the locker rooms, and slapping each other on the back while bragging about how darn fast they managed to run for that one little burst.

Found via karynthia:

A swimming pool kicked out a bunch of kids from a camp that had a contract to use the pool because they "changed the complexion" of the establishment.

The movie Beyond The Sea had a dramatization of Bobby Darin's advocacy on behalf of comedian George Kirby being allowed to perform the coveted opening spot as his warm-up act at the Copacabana Club, the crown jewel of the club scene. My understanding is that the broad strokes of the story are correct, but I can't pretend to know the actual details of any conversation or anyone's motivations, so understand I'm talking about the scene in the movie, not presenting it as real life. It works as metaphor.

The scene goes like this: the owner of the Copa tells Bobby Darin that it's not his policy to doesn't let colored performers perform. Bobby reminds him that Sammy Davis, Jr. just played the Copa. The owner replies, "Sammy's a headliner."

Sammy's a headliner.

A star attraction being allowed to do his thing isn't the same thing as an up-and-comer being given a fair shake, which isn't the same thing as anyone being let in through the door. When somebody achieves something, that doesn't prove that anybody can... it's when even the "nobodies" are treated fairly that we're really getting somewhere.

When "integration" means that a rich, successful man who is a darling of the media and who draws a packed house is tolerated for his ability to make a nightclub owner an awful lot of money, it's not integration. The same country that elected Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. to the highest office in the land... favoring him over the candidate who would have been succeeding an unpopular incumbent, against a candidate whose party as associated with a potentially era-defining economic crisis and a series of unpopular conflicts, against a candidate who ran a badly mismanaged campaign characterized more by a series of ill-considered stunts than anything else... also contains stories like the one linked to above.

And those are the ones that garner enough media attention to be noticed by a white person in the middle states.

I don't know how much it seems like I talk about racism, to you folks. It's not my "thing" in general, because... it doesn't have to be. If I were going to be a dedicated blogger against intolerance and injustice, I could probably think of five issues that affect me more than racism. I don't even have to think to come up with three. Any time one of us (i.e., "white us") hears the words "racial privilege" and says, "What privilege? I come from a poor background. My employer is an equal opportunity employer. I never had any advantages. What privilege?", there's a huge chunk of an answer for you: we don't have to care about this shit.

It doesn't have to matter to us that a bus load of kids can be told they're going on a fun outing and go through the trouble of putting on their swim trunks and their little bathing suits and lotioning up and finding their ear plugs and their nose clips and blowing up their arm floaties and going out into the hot sun... and then told the party's over, they have to go home.

Try telling a kid that America's "post-racial" after they've gone through that.

Of course, some people do...

It's not about race They were simply making people uncomfortable. There have been complaints. It's not that we're racist, no, see, we even hire minorities. But you're making the established clientele nervous. Wait, what? I'm sorry, but there is no need for that sort of insinuation... we're just trying to keep a happy customer base and maintain the atmosphere of our club. Why do you people always insist on making it about race? There are people with real problems in the world, and if all you have to worry about is not being allowed to go in a swimming pool, then I guess you don't have it so bad, do you?

*barf*

Do you remember what it was like to be a kid and get all excited about something and then have it snatched away? Even when there was a good reason. God, I had a fingertip cut off when it got caught in a heavy screen door when I was pre-K. We were going to the playground, which was like two houses down from our house and which we consequently got to go to about every single day, but we were going there and I was excited and my brother was excited and in our mutual excitement we managed to get a door swinging shut on my finger. I got taken to the hospital and I had my first experience with stitches and I came home looking like I was 2% mummy, which was pretty cool... and then I asked my mom, "So now we go to the playground, right?"

I think I was more devastated by being told that no, after enduring that pain and that trauma and ordeal, that it was too late and it was dark and I needed rest. That was like adding insult to injury. I don't remember the names of the people I met Tuesday night but I remember that. Disappointment sticks like nothing else.

Of course, when I got even a little bit older, I could look back and know that my mother was only being sensible. Today, I see it as a kind of a cute kids-say-the-darnedest-things, oh-they're-so-resilient story when viewed from the outside. All that pain and injury, and what I really cared about was getting to play on the jungle gym.

But imagine going through something like that, being all excited about something, and then being told no, you can't... and being crushed with disappointment... and that it's not because of something that makes any sense when you get some perspective from it...

"Not being allowed to swim in a chlorinated and filtered commercial swimming pool" might seem like the epitome of what's called a "first world problem", but the lingering effects of that kind of incredibly pointed discrimination transcend any barriers of class or economic status.

And imagine being the camp counselors who got the kids all pumped up for their outing and then have to deal with the fallout. Gah. I can imagine that, in terms of excitement and disappointment, but that's as far as I can take it.

I think karnythia had said all of this much better than I did, possibly many times, with much fewer words: "post-racial my ass".

But then, she's had a lot more opportunities to refine her message.

Comments

[hnmic.livejournal.com]

y'know every time someone brings up that Obama got elected I'm reminded of a thing CNN did where they went around with a camera and asked people who they voted for. They stopped at a house in Alabama with a rebel flag flying, when asked, the little white lady proudly proclaimed, on camera, "We voted for that nigger boy."

[stormcaller3801.livejournal.com]

For the sake of, well, hearing myself talk, allow me to share a story that hit rather close to home. The college I graduated from- twice- got a donation of several million dollars from a couple. This couple was extremely well known locally and had run a number of highly prosperous businesses in town. Not only did the college get renamed after these two, but there were a great many awards and comments about how wonderful and magnanimous they were.

Well, one evening my parents went to a party. I can't recall just what it was for; just some big tuxedo-required event. While they were there, they ran into this upstanding, magnanimous couple. And as part of a conversation, the wife offered up her opinion on the potential first black president of the US.

"It won't matter whether or not that nigger gets elected. If he does he'll be shot within a week."

I don't think her opinion, or the opinion of various other people who were on camera prior to the election, spontaneously changed because their candidate lost.

Beyond that though? I think Tales of MU is a fairly persistent advocate against racism. An unusual but consistent one that brings it up now and again.

And I think that there's a core problem with a lot of these things, something that's difficult to deal with. There's a lack of identity, not only for any given race, but for genders as well. I make a point of reading stories aimed at and by women- a lot of them are involved with trying to figure out just what feminism is. Similarly I read things from and by blacks, and I see a wide range of opinions about what it is to be black- what it means, what it should be, what the label should imply and what's not 'acceptable behavior' if you happen to be black, and according to other blacks (e.g., Bill Cosby's commentary about proper speech, Michael Steele's 'hip hop' GOP leadership), and ultimately I come down to the idea that I can't quite understand it, because I'm not in there, but it certainly seems like there's a struggle with the question of identity- something that all the stereotypes, bias, and prejudice aren't making any easier.

[stormcaller3801.livejournal.com]

You know I don't think that last part has anything to do with the rest. Or was done baking.

[ferwe.livejournal.com]

I agree that Tales of MU advocates against racism. The scene where the rules in the Dining Hall changed and Jamie is thinking "If that's the least thing they have to put up with . . ." Well, it is, and Jamie not knowing the full situation is written very well.

I also particularly liked the walkout from the elvish history class. Sometimes there's nothing you can do, but I'd like to think I'd make a statement like that.

[auralfixations.livejournal.com]

Well I hope you won't block me for posting this, but I'm going to assume that there's a difference between leaving a race comment on a race discussion thread and leaving one on a story thread, but feel free to delete.

I live in Chicago, and I've lived both in mostly-white suburbs, and black neighborhoods where I was literally the only white person within 3 blocks who wasn't there to buy drugs. It's my personal opinion that (at least in this city, I can't speak about the rest of the US) so-called "race problems" are really a matter of class and culture.

I think that there are few middle class white people who would mind living down the block from a middle class black or hispanic family (class) who went to Ravinia, had their kids on a preschool waiting list, had tea or afternoon cocktails with the neighbors, and more or less acted like typical yuppies (culture). In other words, I think few people in the Chicago suburbs would mind living next-door to the Obamas.

Someone who has embraced middle class white culture (yes there is white culture, and by middle class I mean real middle class, not working class) not associating with anyone who embraces urban working class black culture really a racist? Or is it cultural superiority, the same way the exact same person would likely look down on anyone who embraced "redneck" culture and watched Nascar and Blue Collar Comedy?

From my experience, middle class white people don't mind minorities so long as they're middle class and "act white." Working class white people tend to be split - half of them are either more racist, because they see blacks as competition for their jobs, and the other half embrace black urban culture and adopt the dress, music, and speech inflections.

And I don't see that as racism. I see it as classism and ethnocentricism. And I hate to say it but classism and ethnocentricism have always, and most likely will always, be around. Every culture throughout history has had its upper classes and lower classes and the two don't generally mix - they have little common ground to discuss. And ethnocentricism, until recently, was just a US problem. If you moved to France, you acted French. If you moved to Japan, you acted Japanese. When in Rome, as they say.

But the US was always a "melting pot" of different races, and with them came different cultures. And most people tend to socialize with other people who have the same cultural values. It's not racist, and it's certainly not only racist when white people do it.

Obviously there's always going to be a small group of racists (neo nazis, kkk) just like there's always going to be a small group of sexists, a small group of religious fundamentalists (why are the Amish never called fundamentalists anyway? Right, tangent.), a small group of people who want to ban gay marriage...that will NEVER go away. Google "church of rael" and you'll see what I mean - there's always going to be a group of kooks who think what they think and that's it. They'll make headlines every so often to sell news but they're not indicative of a wider problem.

As for that news article, IF the only reason the children were kicked out was their skin tone then yes I agree that's racist. I also think that a private club should be able to have whoever it wants as a member based on whatever criteria it chooses.

[stormcaller3801.livejournal.com]

I think the problem comes from when you say "they expect them to act white." Why? Because of something I was rambling about- there's a matter of identity. It's the key to... well, everything. Skin color, gender, sexual preference, religion, language, nationality, anything and everything. It's a matter of accepting there are differences and not looking down on someone for them, as opposed to expecting someone to abandon that identity in order to fit in.

The moment you expect someone to conform to your identity or else be shunned is the moment it all goes pear-shaped.

[auralfixations.livejournal.com]

I agree completely that it's a matter of identity, but I think a distinction should be drawn between legal discrimination (minorities can't hold certain jobs, vote, buy houses in a certain neighborhood) and clique behavior (people are only friends with people who act, dress, and talk the way they do).

Even when it comes to employment, a company wants to hire people that will represent them the way they want to be represented. Discrimination is a specialty boutique hiring a white person who acts ghetto over a black person who acts middle-class. It's not racist discrimination to refuse to hire a minority who isn't part of the culture that your shop caters to, that's just good business sense.

Everyone should have the right to choose their own cultural identity, but that doesn't mean everyone will like it. When I was a teenager, I was a total gypsy goth chick. I wore torn ball gowns to class my first year of college. And I didn't mind people saying I was weird, or a freak, because to quote a song a friend of mine made, they're "the kind of people I don't want liking me anyway." When I got older, I didn't like the attention as much, and started to 'fit in' with jeans and pink tops, and there are repercussions for that too - when I go to goth or industrial clubs I'm looked at like an outsider.

I think it's arrogant to act or dress a certain way and then get angry when people judge you based on those behaviors. And I don't think it's racism. Racism, to me, is two people acting exactly the same way, but one gets preferential treatment because of their skin tone.

[amber-indikaze.livejournal.com]

Ethnocentrism has been a problem in every culture imaginable, unless it was an island with no contact with anyone. Where it became a big(ger) problem was with the invention/popularization of world travel, and the subsequent massive colonialism that resulted. America is only different in that it built many of its structures on the backs of immigrant labor and so had no choice but to respect them.

Also, pure racism does still exist. Take many of these people who seem to be only suffering from "ethnocentrism" and put them in a room with a bunch of black people, who are, say, reading quietly, chatting a bit, and wearing school uniforms, in a library, and that "well I'm fine with black people as long as they act white" guy will probably flee from the room. (this is an analogy to what happened here; whether or not you believe me or reject it because "real racism doesn't exist so obviously you're mistaken")

It's still racism. What they really mean is "I'm fine with black people as long as I can ignore them and/or their blackness"

(why are the Amish never called fundamentalists anyway? Right, tangent.)

They are, as much as extremist Muslims are.

[centauress.livejournal.com]

...Because the Amish formed their religion before the founding of Fundamentalism, which was a redefining of the meaning of the Christian Bible.

So, uhh, yeah.

No, I won't block you. I'll just give you the response you merit.

[alexandraerin.livejournal.com]

You ever see an argument about copyright issues on the internet where some genius who thinks he's making a salient and original and clever point that will utterly blow everybody's mind and stop the stupid argument in its tracks pipes up and goes, "You know we're just talking about 0s and 1s, right? There is no actual movie/picture/song here. It's all just 0s and 1s."

That's pretty much what you're doing here.

You're going, "Man, I keep hearing people talk about this National Forest, and I went out there, and I paid for an entry sticker for my windshield, and DAMN IT if I wasn't ripped off... there was no forest, just a bunch of fucking trees."

Okay. Yes. From a certain point of view, there really is actually no such thing as race. We are not a planet of Vulcans and Elves and Gelflings. We are all members of the human race.

And the thing is, the human race is fucking complicated. We have an organ inside our heads that is more complicated than most life forms. One organ. Each individual one of us is more complicated than some entire species. Six billion of us on a planet... or even three hundred million of us in a country with two centuries of its own history which built on three more centuries of colonial/imperial history are so fucking complicated that the sciences that describe and predict our behavior are called "soft sciences" because we don't have the information or the processing power needed to understand it.

So we have this complicated intersection of class and ethnicity and culture, all these different things that are themselves "noexistent" in the same way as race, in that they are socially contructed concepts that are once arbitrary and at the same time very ill-defined... and they are all inextricably bound together because we never get them in a vacuum, and so in order to be able to deal with this, in order to be able to talk about and experience it on a conscious level, we treat the point where all this stuff of cultural and personal identity crashes together as a singular thing, a concept, and we call it "race".

Because we need a way to talk about it. The same way that we need a way to deal with a whole unit of trees as a forest, the same way it's far more useful to deal with a discrete collection of data as the file it represents than as the raw binary.

And then there's the fact that saying "NO, IT'S NOT RACE, IT'S ETHNICITY AND CLASS" is all too often a convenient way of shutting down conversations that need to happen by challenging the grounds on which they're being held.

And I hate to say it but classism and ethnocentricism have always, and most likely will always, be around.

You're absolutely right. We will never get rid of them.

That's why we must never stop trying to get rid of them.

Because that's the only way things can get better.

And more than that, it's the only way to fight the tendency of things to get worse.

(To be continued)

[alexandraerin.livejournal.com]

I also think that a private club should be able to have whoever it wants as a member based on whatever criteria it chooses.

And I think that anybody who thinks it's okay to kick kids out of a pool like that is a stupid fucking piece of shit.

Above and beyond any question of whether the pool owners were within their rights, I think who thinks it was okay for them to do that is a stupid fucking hateful piece of shit.

I'm not applying that label to you... I am inviting you to check it out for fit. Why is it even a priority for you to point out that a private club should be able to have whoever it wants as a member? Why is that viewpoint worth a sentence and the time it takes to post it when this shit is going on?

And where does it stop?

We live in a specialized society where almost no one is an island, and it takes a bare minimum level of privilege and opportunity for anyone to truly be self-sufficient. So if private organizations can choose who to do business with and who not to do business with, absolutely and with no limits, you have just made murder legal. You have. Because people can't survive in urbanized America without access to goods and services. If there is the wrong balance of majority and minority, and the majority has an absolute right to refuse business with the minority (or vice versa if there's a huge power imbalance, hypothetically), then it is legal to consign someone to slow death by starvation and deprivation.

So where do you draw the line? You might feel it's okay to go, "Okay, well, obviously you have to let everyone buy food and purchase medical care, but no one's entitled to use a pool or go to a private school or join a private club. Those aren't essential services." But then where do you... you know, what. No. I'm not even going to finish this chain of thought. If you don't understand what kind of evil... not just douchebaggery but evil... you're advocating for under the delusion that you're standing up for individual rights.

You know what? Fuck it. I'm done. You're not blocked, but shut the fuck up and educate yourself.

[auralfixations.livejournal.com]

I didn't say I thought it was okay for them to kick the kids out like that. I think it was tasteless, classless and rude. If their view was that they didn't want the kids there, they should have informed the camp counselors at the end of the day, saying that they hoped the kids enjoyed the experience but they wished to cancel any future sessions.

I think that IF a private club wants to discriminate on the basis of race, it should be legal, because it's a private club. Private clubs also (should) have the right to discriminate based on gender, income, profession, religion, family name, and a lot of things that public places (ie restaurants and grocery stores) don't.

"Above and beyond any question of whether the pool owners were within their rights, I think who thinks it was okay for them to do that is a stupid fucking hateful piece of shit."

I wasn't saying I personally thought it was okay, or that they were good people, I was just saying I thought they were acting within their rights.

If you're done, I'm done, because I don't want to stress anyone out, but I did want to clarify that bit.

[alexandraerin.livejournal.com]

think that IF a private club wants to discriminate on the basis of race, it should be legal, because it's a private club.

So what's the difference between a private club and a privately owned grocery store, from your ethical/legal standpoint? A privately owned hospital or physician's practice? What is it in the nature of being a "club" that places denying access to goods and services on the basis of race within the bounds of even grudging acceptability that doesn't apply to other businesses?

And if there isn't a difference... well, I've already elaborated on the consequences there.

And if there is a difference... what's to stop everybody who wants to control access to the shit people need to get along from calling themselves "clubs"? Big warehouse grocery stores already call themselves price clubs and charge members for membership... should they have the right to get more selective in their application process and deny particular groups of people access to the cheapest bulk rates for food and other staples? And if the answer's yes, what (apart from basic human decency, tee hee I made a funny) stops the smaller grocery stores from doing the same?

I know it's tempting to stand behind such principles as individual rights and a man's home(/business) is his castle and so forth, but we have a created a society of mutual dependency. No one asks to be born into it, but so long as we're not being dicks to each other, it's actually a great system. I don't have to grow my own food or make my own computer or create my own internet infrastructure or correct my own eyesight, and so I have time to entertain people (and yell at them on the internet). Yay, awesome. But this only works when people have free access to the other parts of the system.

You might just ignore all this and think, "Look, I'm not talking about kicking people out of grocery stores. I'm just saying as a general principle I believe that private clubs have the right to choose their own members."

That's fine. I mean, fine in the sense of "you are within your rights to think that."

But that doesn't change what it is you're advocating for.


I wasn't saying I personally thought it was okay, or that they were good people, I was just saying I thought they were acting within their rights.

Yes. And I just invited you to explore why you thought that was so important to stress, as if they're being victimized somehow for all this negative attention for them choosing to act upon this "right" to be jackasses to a bunch of kids on a hot day.

If you're comfortable with not examining that... well, see above.

[auralfixations.livejournal.com]

First of all, I wasn't stressing the point, it was a one sentence afterthought. And no I don't think they're being victimized, I think they should accept the consequence of their decision.

The reason I added it was because I read that some politician was 'looking into' it and I've noticed that there's a tendency for things that reach a consensus of "That's wrong" (Which, I agree with, what they did is wrong, and I don't think they're good people for it) to automatically go to the next step of "They shouldn't be allowed to do that" - which I completely disagree with.

As far as the difference between a private club and a privately owned business, a quick web search brought up NC's legal guidelines, I'd assume most states have a similar one. In a nutshell, a private club is restricted to social purposes (no hospitals or shops), has to have a clear list of criteria for membership, has to collect dues, can't be open to the public in general, and has to keep a list of members.


04 NCAC 02S .0107 SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR PRIVATE CLUBS (a) Definition. A private club is a private facility organized and operated by a person, association or corporation solely for a social, recreational, patriotic or fraternal purpose. Use of the facility shall not be open to the general public but shall belimited to members of the private club and their guests.

(c) Mandatory Requirements. To qualify as a private club, a facility shall meet the following requirements concerning membership:

(1) collect an annual membership fee separate from any admission or cover charge, no dues from which may be more than 30 days past due;

(2) maintain a written policy on the granting of full and limited memberships;

(3) require each prospective member to complete a written application that contains questions directly relatedto the applicant's interest in the social, patriotic, fraternal or recreational purpose of the club, the applicant's qualifications for membership, and the applicant's background;

(4) retain each completed application, if approved, in the organization's permanent records as long as the individual's membership continues;

(5) grant no membership sooner than three days after receipt of application;

(6) issue written or printed evidence of membership to each member, which evidence of membership or other reasonably reliable document of identification shall be in the possession of each member present on the licensed premises;

(7) maintain on the premises a current alphabetical roster of all members and their complete addresses;

(8) maintain and provide to each member a written policy concerning the use of facilities by guests.

[alexandraerin.livejournal.com]

First of all, according to the article, the club had "open enrollment". That's an imprecise term... it could just mean that they were accepting applications from the general public, or it could mean that their "application" process was pay a membership fee and join (like most fitness "clubs" and grocery store "price clubs"), no selectivity involved. That being the case, it could be a public business and not a private club.

More, these kids didn't apply for membership and they weren't turned down! The private club decided to contract with the camp for access to their pool. The fact that the club might have the backwards-ass "right" to discriminate on the basis of race* for memberships doesn't grant them the right to do so in a business they decide to operate on their premises, does it?

I am not a lawyer, but it seems to me that a club could have a shop on the premises that's only for club members, but if it's got a door on the public street and a sign that says "Public welcome!" so that "anyone" walk in and buy stuff, they can't start kicking out the people with visible disabilities or the Eastern Europeans.

If they were worried about some of the walk-ins "changing the tone", then their only recourse would be to stop allowing the general public to use their club shop.

I get the impression that the end result of the campers' first visit was that the club decided to do just this... I believe the article said they canceled contracts with other camps as well. It certainly seems like they reconsidered the whole idea.

And they only might have been within their rights to do that... I would imagine those contracts had a clause that said they could be canceled at any time for any or no reason. Either that or these are idiots with a fetish for courtrooms. The problem is... they were stupid enough to give a reason when they probably didn't have to, and they did it in a way that 1) resulted in a lot of disappointed kids and 2) put the worst possible reason on full display and given us some heart-wrenching footage of some very disappointed children.

In America, we have anti-discrimination laws and we have certain categories of people that are recognized as protected classes... using them as criteria for certain things is considered to be legally "suspect". I'm not sure how that would unfold when it's a contract between a day camp and the club... while not acting as a private club when it inks these deals with camps is also not under any obligation to give one to anybody who walks through the door... but if race is also a suspect class for such contract discrimination in that jurisdiction...

Well, I think that's an excellent reason for the government to be "looking into this", to figure out if they did break any law and what they can be hit with as a consequence.

If somebody in the government wants lawyers and investigators who are trained in the specifics of these matters to look at exactly what happened and figure out any laws that were broken and then put the wheels of justice in motion to punish those who did it... glory glory, Hallelujah. The system might actually work. In the meantime, your opinion that the right of the club to discriminate takes primacy over all else in the matter is just that... an opinion, not a balanced viewpoint or a voice of reason. It's an opinion that is siding against the angels and with the douchebags. I mean, there are people who aren't overt racists who still believe in "states' rights" to the extent that they believe the majority should be able to vote for state laws that are discriminatory against one race or sex or whatever.

[centauress.livejournal.com]

This isn't really targeted at Erin, merely adding to her point.

Private clubs actually can be racist. Or sexist. Or whatever. Because they're private clubs.

The moment they take money itself in return for access, they're a public accommodation. No longer a private club. And therefore subject to the requirements that entails - disabled parking spots, ramps, health inspections, allowing police and emergency access, requirements to follow safety procedures for fire and building codes, etc.

Why? Because we made a government which watches over these things, so that you know you can walk down a road safely, eat in a restaurant safely, and not die horribly for someone else's greed in our otherwise capitalistic society.

[caret-mox.livejournal.com]

That first article linked to another article that gave the club's perspctive. They say they renigged on the deal with the campers because they didn't realize how much they would crowd the pool. They got complaints from members about not being notified ahead of time and the unexpected crowding. If I were a member at a private pool club, I have to say I'd be a little put off by an onslaught of kids. It has nothing to do with minorities. I don't know how big the pool is and how crowded 65 kids plus the regular members looks at the specific club but I can see that as a reasonable realistic non-racist complaint. I personally don't like kids. They're noisy (dear god can they scream and shriek) and rowdy and clingy.

[alexandraerin.livejournal.com]

Accepting the pool's account means taking them at their word when they tell us, effectively, that they are shitty businesspeople who like losing money by not thinking through their business decisions and then explaining themselves in the worst possible terms.

Can I give them the benefit of the doubt and assume instead that they're reasonably intelligent people who simply have a blindspot about race?

If not, then why would this company sign a contract to allow 65 swimmers into their pool? We can assume they crunched numbers, they looked at their capacity and the money they make off a group rate like that versus their odds of attracting that many individual members using the pool on those particular specified days. And they offered the deal.

o what changed when the kids showed up? What new information gave them the power to recognize their mistake? Why were these sixty five children... who had already been slotted for and allotted for... suddenly "crowding" the pool?

As for it being a "reasonable realistic non-racist complaint"... I would bet if we had a perfect psychic brain wave examining machine, we could go to most of the parents/members who complained and scan their brains for the answer to the question, "Is racism wrong?" and the machine would have gone, "YES IT IS WRONG", and then the answer to the question, "Is it okay to deny people access to something based on the color of their skin?" and the machine would tell us, "NO IT IS NOT OKAY"... and possibly the same would even be true of the people who made the decision to expel the camp and cancel their contract.

And that doesn't prove it's not racist. People who know it's wrong to steal still do so, in what they think of as tiny and incidental ways that don't count and that no one will know about, ways that aren't so bad compared to others. That's how we end up cheating on tests and on our diets and on our lovers. A person can be morally and ethically opposed to something and still indulge in it. We are, as a species, geniuses at self-justification.

Racism does not consist solely of people who say "I HATE THE BLACKS AND I HATE THE MEXICANS AND I'M GLAD WE THREW THEM OUT." I would hazard that the tiny core of die hard racists who actually think, feel, and act that way are probably not the biggest or worst component of racism in America.

Sure they were kicked out because the pool was crowded. Certainly it was a rude shock for the patrons to show up on what was probably a previously slow day of the week and find the pool filling up with noisy, rambunctious kids. But so much goes into our perceptions of what it is to be "crowded", what it takes before X number of people in Y amount of space press upon you to the point that you can't help be intensely aware of them, what behaviors we notice to the point that they register as disruptive.

The club members didn't know that camps were allowed in? What the fuck does that even mean? The club allegedly had open enrollment. That means that supposedly all sixty five of these children could have been signed up as individuals by their parents, and assuming the pool was not over its rated capacity (I think that's a fair assumption since if it had been we'd be hearing that as the official excuse) they could all have shown up to swim on the same day.

But this is a "predominantly white" club, we're told... possibly this has to do with the neighborhood it's in, possibly it has to do with economic factors, possibly it has to do with a general perception that it's a "predominantly white club", a self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts, and possibly--likely--it's a confluence of all of these things. Whatever it is, it means that these particular kids wouldn't have been showing up in numbers without the group deal for camps.

Whether or not the people who complained ever thought to themselves, "I DON'T WANT TO SHARE A POOL WITH BLACK KIDS", this is still racism in action. It's not as simple and clear cut as "GOSH I HATE THOSE PEOPLE", which makes it harder to acknowledge and less satisfying to denounce.

[caret-mox.livejournal.com]

"Accepting the pool's account means taking them at their word when they tell us, effectively, that they are shitty businesspeople who like losing money by not thinking through their business decisions and then explaining themselves in the worst possible terms."

That actually IS what I'm saying. Not that they like losing money, of course, but that they made a mistake in offering the deal then taking it away. Shitty businesspeople are everywhere and when they screw over a customer it's not always due to racism. The members may have been racist, but does that make the owners racist by association?

I've recently been a little screwed over by a car accident. The police wouldn't talk to me to get my side or explain things to me. The insurance company wouldn't call me back after I left message after message and the body shop delayed taking even a LOOK at my car til a month later. I've been lied to, treated condescendingly and rudely, and just been plain SCREWED OVER.

If I were black, I bet I could claim I was discriminated against. But I'm not. So I just get screwed over and it may just be for no reason at all. Not every inconvenience is to blame for racism, and to be treated like I'm not as inconvenienced because I'm white, well... frankly it sounds like racism.

[alexandraerin.livejournal.com]

Not every inconvenience is to blame for racism, and to be treated like I'm not as inconvenienced because I'm white, well... frankly it sounds like racism.

You know that it would not be credible that you were inconvenienced in that situation for being white... not plausible to the point that it's something you have any reason to actively wonder or worry about on a day-to-day basis, when you encounter inconveniences... when you get singled out for attention from officials... when you get turned away or scrutinized. You don't have to waste brain cycles trying to decode the meaning and cause of such interactions. You don't have to shore up your will to keep going and to continue doing the things you were doing when you encounter such obstacles against the possibility that it will happen again because of your skin color.

In short, you are not as inconvenienced because you're white. Oh, no, does that sound racist? Try not to drown in the river of tears I'm crying for you.

AND HELL FUCKING YES IT MAKES THE OWNERS RACIST, NOT BY ASSOCIATION BUT BY DINT OF THEIR OWN ACTIONS.

[stormcaller3801.livejournal.com]

After thinking this through on both sides and looking at the statements of what happened (I know, terrible habit; I keep this up I'll end up in law school) I've come to the conclusion that there's a sort of middle ground which more or less says that it wasn't the kids' fault and the club owners weren't being racist. But that doesn't mean the club owners were right to do what they did.

The entire thing seems to have begun because of the club members. At least one, if not more, complained to the club staff. The club staff likely were unsure what to do here- because you're dealing with paying, long-time members and a group of newly-arrived kids who have a deal to use the club you know nothing about. And so they either made a bad call or they punted it to the owner.

And the owner basically decided that it was a question of being racist or pissing off his main revenue source (club members). Do you anger the group of people you depend on for your livelihood and whom you have to deal with on a regular basis, or the people you barely know, who paid you a relatively small lump sum and you won't have to see again (and who may not even know your face)?

So the club management can reassure themselves they're not racist (they're just looking after their members, in their mind), the staff don't feel their wrong because it wasn't their decision (and I expect the 'complexion' comment originated from a club member and was being used without citation), the club members don't think they're racist because it's their private club... and the kids get screwed over. Because everyone's convinced themselves they're not being racist, due to being more concerned about covering their own asses than the color of anyone's skin. With the exception of the club members, who don't have to own up to it because the club ownership are the ones who're taking the fall. But I expect they're likely rationalizing it to themselves as well.

[alexandraerin.livejournal.com]

I can completely agree with your analysis as being plausible and likely, but where I differ is with the phrase "and the club owners weren't being racist". "Weren't acting on their own overt prejudice", maybe. They were committing an act of institutionalized racism. I can't call that anything other than racist, and I think that using a definition of racism that includes the personal and immediate... well, that's the sort of thinking that ends in people declaring there really isn't that many problems caused by racism any more.

This kind of thing slides by because everybody involved can point to how they're really "not racist, but..." The only way to stop them is to make people realize it's still not acceptable, which I think means calling it what it is and labeling those involved as a bunch of "racist, but"s.

[stormcaller3801.livejournal.com]

Weren't acting on their own overt prejudice sounds very close to what I was intending to say. They didn't say, "We didn't know there'd be black kids," they just had members complaining, likely realized the complaints were racist, but went along with it because of monetary concerns and possibly cowardice.

And I also agree on the 'racist, but' part. I didn't mention it above but it reminded me of the MU scene regarding the campus cops and weapon checks. That sort of 'soft racism' where it's rationalized as not being racist, yet doing things that are racist anyways because you can think up a rationale to justify it to yourself.

[stormcaller3801.livejournal.com]

I actually considered another comparison, but I realized that it would probably elicit cries of 'Godwin's Law,' and I also am not nearly so well informed about the history involved in that comparison, so I could be wrong there.

[aniraangel.livejournal.com]

Not being American, I see this stuff and I go '.....er?' because, honestly... the idea of throwing people out of anywhere because of the colour of their skin is absurd. Even if the area I live in is more or less white... there are Aboriginal folks around here, and Asians, I believe there was a family from India... English, South African... even if most aren't, they're still here and if I don't like them it's not because of their skin colour, it's because they're pains in some way. Like the boy in my science class who used to think it would be fun to make overt sexual innuendos and run off with my pencil case.

I thought he was an arse, but that's because he was. He was Aboriginal, which is hard to forget because he adored pulling attention to the fact... and I don't know? I've met people of different races I've adored, and some who no matter what colour they were make me want to do unfortunate, violent things...

That's not to say some people aren't out to get other races... just that there can be things other than colour that motivate people to do things.


...Also, I've always wondered.. isn't calling people "white trash" just as bad as say, calling and African American something?? Americans, you constantly perplex me...

At any rate, my funnest answer is always Avenue Q... because a little humour is good for the soul...

[alexandraerin.livejournal.com]

I like Avenue Q, but I'm growing to hate that song because it's always thrown into discussions like this, and it's usually used as an excuse not to do shit about racism and more particularly for people not to examine themselves for racist behaviors they may not even be aware of.

Yes, everybody harbors racist attitudes... and no, racism will probably never be removed from human society without a drastic reordering of the same... so, how is that a signal that we should all relax and forget about it? Everyone's more than a little bit mortal, but that doesn't mean we stop eating and start walking off curbs without waiting for a gap in traffic.

"Everyone stop being so P.C." is such a bullshit answer to anything, because "political correctness" is a bullshit concept. The phrase only exists so that politicians (and, for some bizarre reason, Shania Twain) can get ovations for saying they're not going to be it. It's a phrase made to satirize and deride attempts at sensitivity and... quite often... actual correctness. Nobody actually believes in being politically correct... the people who are accused of it are simply making a stance as to what they believe to be actually correct... radical shit like treating human beings as fucking human beings.

[aniraangel.livejournal.com]

I think the actual point is that we should all stop bickering over terms and start trying to get alone.Have you seen how the UN works? They argue over How the seats are set out and seldom have any time to actually work out problems.

I highly doubt it's promoting the use of hateful words while everyone is relaxing... but, point noted. No more muppets for AE.

I don't rend to comment on racial discussions on the internet, or post on them, because it's such a heated issue and no one ever seems to find a solution or happy medium that doesn't involve issuing a though/speech police... which would be rubbish, of course.

Sigh.

[alexandraerin.livejournal.com]

I'm not talking about the point of the song as it's intended, I'm talking about the way it's become the Anthem of Interjection into conversations about race, and the effect its pervasiveness has on the conversation.

(Though with the caveat that I'm not talking about the point of the song, I think you're being overly generous to the creators of the musical--a funny, clever musical with some good points--in your interpretation of the song's intended message.)

[aniraangel.livejournal.com]

Mmn, probably am being too generous, it's been a shitty week and I tend to be more inclined to want to believe in the good in humanity when I have those.

Especially when it involves puppets. I used to puppeteer. Small blindspot, mayhap.

[aniraangel.livejournal.com]

In general, I know... There are race riots in Sydney(usually in redford), and it's a little precarious going around certain towns on certain days if you are of a certain colour (and no, I'm not generalising... It does happen.)

But honestly?

I don't care what colour people are, ultimately they are still people just like everyone else and that's all that should matter.

Sometimes I really miss being six when I wanted to grow up to be pocahontas and no one told my silly little self that I couldn't.

[auralfixations.livejournal.com]

Aussies have a lot of PC posturing but there's a backlash there too, at least from what I've seen.

I'm guessing that's an Aussie crowd cheering because I've never met an American who knew the Leyland brothers.

[aniraangel.livejournal.com]

..I've actually never heard that before. Huh... O_o

I replied to your last comment, I think you deleted it when I was replying.

Anyway, I don't recall ever having heard of the leyland brothers, either.

I remember once, some of the local elders came into town and they were doing a clensing in the main street, I was absolutely thrilled... I thought they were more than awesome... it was only when I came on the internet when I was 12 or so I really noticed these racial problems. I don't know what that means, but it's the truth.

I suppose...

[drooling-ferret.livejournal.com]

I suppose I shouldn't be shocked that the vast majority of the previous comments were of the "well, I agree, but..." variety. I am a little, though.

The degree of not-getting-it necessary to make a statement that proves the point you were making and think one is offering a valid counter argument... just, wow.

First time long time, btw.

I just wrote about racism

[interestinghell.livejournal.com]

in my blog, except i have a different twist on it because I'm currently in Australia. Give it a read, let me know what you think.

http://jennahasnoidea.blogspot.com/2009/06/race-relations.html