quote:Originally posted by Dogbreath: Again, where exactly is the evidence of all this power?
Haven't you ever heard the one about how well endowed black men are, for example? I don't know if there have been any reliable studies on penis size across the board, much less for particular racial groups. Not quite sure how such a study would be done, though I suppose it's possible. Anyway, it's a stereotype I used to hear when I was younger, for example, before I came into the nerve to tell someone straight up when they were saying something that sounded racist.
Anyway, that's an example of a form of power...specialness?...not sure of a good word, that some people invest in minorities. Could you perhaps restate your position, Dogbreath? I'm not sure where the point of disagreement is, since to me the notion that a taboo can exert influence over a group of people is pretty straightforward.
Yeah, demographic sexual stereotyping is closer to where we are at these days. Black men as sexual taboo isn't as powerful as it was a decade or three ago.
But black men as rapists is a big part of the stereotype as well. It harkens back to the irrational fear white men (and women by association) had of black men. So powerful was the sexual appetite of black men, the story went, that they couldn't even control themselves walking down the street. White men also implicitly feared white women would be "ruined" for sex with white men after being with a black man.
All of that is the genesis of much subtler, smaller stereotypes we have about black men today.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dogbreath: Again, where exactly is the evidence of all this power?
Haven't you ever heard the one about how well endowed black men are, for example? I don't know if there have been any reliable studies on penis size across the board, much less for particular racial groups. Not quite sure how such a study would be done, though I suppose it's possible. Anyway, it's a stereotype I used to hear when I was younger, for example, before I came into the nerve to tell someone straight up when they were saying something that sounded racist.
Anyway, that's an example of a form of power...specialness?...not sure of a good word, that some people invest in minorities. Could you perhaps restate your position, Dogbreath? I'm not sure where the point of disagreement is, since to me the notion that a taboo can exert influence over a group of people is pretty straightforward.
Yes, I've heard of those stereotypes. And I also have black friends who have a difficult time dating because of them. I doubt, if you asked any of them about them they would say they think they're very empowering. Crude, racist, derogatory, oppressive, belittling, dehumanizing, maybe. Empowering, no. I honestly am quite baffled you think that minority men have been "invested" with this much "power." How exactly are they using this power? Where is the evidence of it's existence? I would say the opposite is true - I think black men have been disenfranchised and segregated against by these stereotypes, to the point where it's actively more difficult for them to date.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: Hey everyone who is already having a discussion here:
Please put it on pause until our latest sockpuppet is removed, and don't even respond to it.
I don't know what you mean by "sockpuppet" or why you're calling for me to be "removed." I registered to share my opinions. It appears you already have in mind the the exact discussion you want to have and don't want to deal with anyone who challenges your perspective.
like the other times you feigned ignorance then later admitted that yeah you were that guy
blackblade: do we have an eta on his re-ban
I feel it necessary to first ascertain the identify of the poster, before just going ahead an banning. Of course subsequent statements by Sinclair will be evaluated whether or not they are TOS compliant.
I'm not confident enough that Sinclair is our chronic troll, I wish if he was he'd do us all a courtesy and stop circumnavigating bans. He was given probably more opportunities to stop than any poster in the history of this board.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Ok, I think I might see the disconnect more clearly now. Please correct me if I'm wrong: I am not suggesting, and I suspect neither is Lyrhawn, that this sexual stereotype is in the least bit a net gain. It's all a hazy blend of guesswork and anecdotal experience for me, but to my mind it's a bit like this: racial minorities, particularly African Americans, are regarded as having a certain sexual 'something' by some people. This idea is often a decent indicator of more plainly racist attitudes.
Someone regarded as having this special power might be deemed to be more sexually potent (meant in a lot of ways), but these ways are very much double edged: a white woman being 'ruined' for sex with other men, though that garbage goes well beyond racism, can be said to be a sign of acknowledgment of sexual prowess. But it's also a reason to lynch someone for looking at a white woman, much less dating one to say nothing of marrying one. Perhaps another way to put it would be '+1 perceived sexual power among some people, at the cost of -5 to law enforcement interactions, access to mainstream culture, acceptability for long term relationships, and likelihood of having legislation specifically against you'.
To continue with the Brooks references, here's a very relevant one that illustrates the whole perceived sexual power at a very high price idea:
"Hey, boys! Lookie what I got here?" "Hey, where are all the white women at?"
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
It sounds a bit like saying that women have all the sexual power. Not exactly the same, but they have a bit of the same smell.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So...wait. My remarking 'some people in our culture regard minorities as having a specific, narrow type of sexual power that is often expressed in overtly demeaning ways, and carries with it huge and often dangerous or disadvantageous drawbacks' has the same smell as 'women have all the sexual power'?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Would it help if we changed minorities often have a stereotype of having sexual power to sexual potency and/or animalistic drive? I think that was what was meant.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rakeesh: I'm sorry, but that's not at all how Lyrhawn phrased his position. Specifically, he said that white men have imbued minoritiy men with sexual power. Which sounds an awful lot like the "men have surrendered all their sexual power, women now hold all the sexual power" argument. If you are actually defending a discrete concept that is different from Lyrhawn's, that's fine, but it's disingenous to change the basis of your argument halfway through and then act like you've been unfairly misinterpreted.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dogbreath, I'm quite sure you're misinterpreting what Lyr meant, probably because of the ambiguous use of the word "power." He's not talking about empowerment, he's talking about the fact that white men have historically projected the idea of uncontrolled sexuality onto other races (and women). The idea of that powerful sexuality was then used to justify "rational" and "civilized" white men maintaining control over the bodies of non-whites and women.
"Sexual power" as Lyr was using it does not translate into relative power in social/societal relationships.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nor does it, in my use here anyway and I suspect his as well, suggest even an overall sexual power. I can see how the misunderstanding arose initially-though I am still baffled by kmbboots's (kmbboots'?) interpretation.
'Empowering', as dkw points out, is not at all what I was getting at. That suggests a net gain, a positive change. There are many things which are short term or narrow benefits but which are a long term or overall drawback. Someone might be highly tolerant to alcohol. If they have this 'advantage' by being a serious alcoholic, well, there is still a small bonus to not getting drink as quickly, perhaps, but no one would suggest it was a net gain.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dkw: Dogbreath, I'm quite sure you're misinterpreting what Lyr meant, probably because of the ambiguous use of the word "power." He's not talking about empowerment, he's talking about the fact that white men have historically projected the idea of uncontrolled sexuality onto other races (and women). The idea of that powerful sexuality was then used to justify "rational" and "civilized" white men maintaining control over the bodies of non-whites and women.
"Sexual power" as Lyr was using it does not translate into relative power in social/societal relationships.
I completely agree that white men have indeed projected those stereotypes on minorities. I doubt there's any contention on that part. My beef is that I sincerely doubt minority men have in any way benefitted from these stereotypes. Rakeesh seems to more or less have the same viewpoint as me, but a lot of things Lyrhawn said makes me think he genuinely believes black men have been "imbued" with sexual power because of these stereotypes, which is more or less the opposite of what is true. Again, I'm literally just taking his words at face value. If he was being sarcastic, he's more than welcome to clarify his position.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I remain genuinely baffled that such a miscommunication (or so it seems to me) has happened. I only know the dude from forum interaction, but it is extremely difficult for me to take as likely that Lyrhawn either a) believes that any racial group at all has a sexual advantage or disadvantage or b) was attempting to use sarcasm in this thread. I'm going to need to re-read again, and maybe then I'll see where the disconnect lies.
(Not putting this on you either, Dog. My confusion isn't an expression of an attack on your statements. I am authentically perplexed.)
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dogbreath: Again, where exactly is the evidence of all this power?
I could point you to about a thousand books, articles, blogs, oral histories and diary entries that talk about it as a phenomenon.
I'm actually fairly surprised this is the first you're hearing of it.
This seems to indicate he truly, genuinely believes this is an actual thing. That this "sexual power" actually exists. (and isn't, say, just a figment of a racist stereotype)
I'm not trying to be belligerent with any of this. Lyrhawn has also struck me as a rational, intelligent poster who I almost always find myself agreeing with. It just strikes me that he legitimately believes this stuff, and his posts haven't really cleared this up.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think when he talked about that, he was alluding to the idea that there is evidence that some people believe and have believe this power exists, and insofar power is a function of belief in power, it exists for that reason.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think Lyrhawn said that minority men have benefitted from these stereotypes. I think you read that into his statements, but it was the opposite of his intended meaning.x
Edit: reread his "imbued with power" post but think "powerful taboo," "powerful stereotype," "powerful image" rather than political or social power.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rakeesh: Yes, but doesn't that imply a level of recursion - if he believes that power exists because people believe that it exists, doesn't his belief in the efficacy of their belief perpetuate the existence of that power? And if I believe that his belief in their belief...
Anyway, it's a minor point, so I'm not going to sweat it. I think my takeaway is that I don't think there can be any positive benefit from racial stereotypes, even if it's a "net negative" or whatever. Consider:
The belief in black men being more animalistic and "wild" sexually has caused overwhelmingly negative repercussions. Anything from legislation against interracial marriage, to pretty much everything that happens in "To Kill a Mockingbird." I think of Kurt Vonnegut's story of a black man being sawed in half on a barbed wire fence. We can all agree some pretty horrible things have been done because of these stereotypes.
But let's say it works out to the "benefit" of a black man. (And this is not nearly as often as the inverse, if my friends can be believed) Say, a woman dates him because she thinks he has a large penis, or because it's a rebellious thing to do and will make her dad angry. These are still negative things, because she's dating him due to misconceived expectations or to make a statement, rather than due to qualities he actually possesses. In the end, he's still objectified and dehumanized, the stereotype is affirmed and perpetuated, and the cycle of injustice continues.
Which is why I refuse to believe there is such a thing as a "positive racial stereotype", or that minorities can in any way be empowered by racism. No net positive or net negative, just all negative.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
err, basically, you nailed it, in ways i can't yet express. "positive" racial stereotypes work that way. just ask all the Asians that are supposed to be ruery rurey good at math.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Clearly my use of the word "power" was a terrible mistake.
I tried to explain it a page back but that didn't seem to take, so suffice it to say, Dogbreath, that I did not mean power in the way you've taken it, and my meaning is more along the lines of what Rakeesh and dkw have been saying.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: that was .. i .. an not used to ..
err, basically, you nailed it, in ways i can't yet express. "positive" racial stereotypes work that way. just ask all the Asians that are supposed to be ruery rurey good at math.
Or being called the "model minority".
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
At this point I will admit to some frustration. Who has endorsed the idea of 'positive racial stereotypes'? Certainly neither Lyrhawn nor I have.
There is some social status in being perceived to be good at sports, regardless of the reality. Therefore, in some limited and very specific scenarios, someone perceived to be good at sports has a slight social benefit. Until such time as they actually play, or don't, that is. Which doesn't in the least dampen the impact of being regarded as more lazy or violent before doing anything.
The Asian kid with a teacher who on the first day of school thinks is very good at math. For a moment, just a moksbt, that particular teacher might think more highly of that student. Stripped of context-which nothing is, really/that would generally be held as a positive. But then the imaginary pause button is released, as we're back in a reality where many people think that Asian kid is great at math (and this is an actual trait of the individual, absent any knowledge), and the African American is good at sports, but if he's not or he wants to be a writer, he's aberrant or trying to be white or something.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rakeesh, I think that your talk of "+1" and "net gain" is part of the problem. Myths of sexual potency exacerbate exclusion from actual social empowerment rather than mitigate it.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rakeesh's +1 and net gain post was in the vein of anticipating objections to one's argument and countering them.
"Even if sometimes some people mange to use these stereotypes to their advantage they are still an overwhelmingly bad thing" is not the same as "well, there are some positives and some negatives, so they're not all bad." It was pretty clear to me that Rakeesh meant the former.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Myths of sexual potency exacerbate exclusion from actual social empowerment rather than mitigate it.
But Kate, isn't that precisely what Rakeesh is saying here?
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Someone regarded as having this special power might be deemed to be more sexually potent (meant in a lot of ways), but these ways are very much double edged: a white woman being 'ruined' for sex with other men, though that garbage goes well beyond racism, can be said to be a sign of acknowledgment of sexual prowess. But it's also a reason to lynch someone for looking at a white woman, much less dating one to say nothing of marrying one. Perhaps another way to put it would be '+1 perceived sexual power among some people, at the cost of -5 to law enforcement interactions, access to mainstream culture, acceptability for long term relationships, and likelihood of having legislation specifically against you'.
posted
I think it's a tough question for sociology and social psych to answer, exactly what the costs and benefits of "positive" racial stereotypes might be. To pretend that we know right now that these stereotypes have a negative effect on people's social standing and net social capital is to greatly overreach.
Yes, a large number of Asian people are disturbed by being stereotyped as the "model minority." On the other hand, this stereotype might land an Asian person a job. Yes, black men and Asian women are disturbed by being fetishized. On the other hand, these people also have the easiest time getting dates on OKCupid (as OKC's data shows).
Whether the psychological stress of the stereotype outweighs the material advantages that accrue to it is a very difficult question to answer and will probably vary a lot from person to person!
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
It probably depends in part on people's aims. If a black dude is not interested in long-term relationships, for example, the stereotype may well help him achieve his goals. On the other hand, this fact may itself drive black guys away from interest in long-term relationships, which may be deleterious to their happiness in the long run. It's all very complicated.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Destineer: Yes, black men and Asian women are disturbed by being fetishized. On the other hand, these people also have the easiest time getting dates on OKCupid (as OKC's data shows).
Do you have a link for this. I did some Googling but found that for both match rates and response rates black men are responded to/matched the least and white men the most. You are correct about Asian women though.
posted
Jake, not really. Or maybe he is but is confusing the issue by saying, "Perhaps another way to put it would be '+1 perceived sexual power among some people, at the cost of -5 to law enforcement interactions, access to mainstream culture, acceptability for long term relationships, and likelihood of having legislation specifically against you'."
Being described as having a mythical sexual potency is a -1 rather than a +1.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Overall I would certainly agree. In some very, very narrowly defined circumstances, I would not.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
And in any event, you're still misunderstanding. At this point I'm not sure how. "Perception of narrow sexual power among a particular group: +1" is not not not the same as simply 'here's extra point'.
If I get a coupon to get some near-expired meat off a roving meat truck with a rickety refrigeration unit...well, yay for me, I guess? Or not at all really.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
A guy who is looking for a one night stand with a stranger meets a girl who him exotic/exciting because he is outside of her cultural norms. I am having trouble considering that a -1 which hampered his goals for the night.
This says nothing of the effects the mysticism has on the rest of the guy's life and how it affects his overall dating life. Just that in that specific case with that specific girl it worked out as a +1 that time.
Posts: 362 | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
If it actually worked that way you might have a point. I think what we're actually talking about here is white men feeling threatened by the precieved sexual prowness of black men and demonizing them because of it without women, white or otherwise, having the equivilent increase in attraction to black men. Like the OK Cupid numbers show, black men are responded to the least in dating. I don't believe that is just among people looking for relationships, I believe it applies to one night stands as well.
I think a big part of it is that when women are making dating decisions they have to take their safety into account way, way more than men do. Black men are preceived as dangerous in our society. For men the sexual part of that might be "they're sexually insatiable, what if they take our women?" where for women it might be "they're sexually insatiable, what if they rape me?" So it's a lose-lose situation, not a win-lose one. And that applies among women looking for casual sex as well as those looking for a relationship.
Women also tend not to be attracted to exoticism in the same way men are, as evidenced by asian women being fetishized but not asian men.
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
(To be clear, I am not trying to justify or agree with those stereotypes. I am just pointing out that the way men think women will react to them and the way women actually react to them are not usually the same. SOME women may be attracted to exoticism, or trying to piss off their parents, or whatever. But if you think black men have an easier time finding one night stands than white men do, you're seriously delusional.)
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
I think the original point was that the murderer felt threatened by interracial dating (or even friendly interactions). He felt like he wasn't getting the female attention he deserved (I shudder to think what form that attention took in his fantasies), and felt that the blame rested with women (all of them) and all the people who women evidently liked more than him.
It's just sick. This is already twisted enough, without even the violence. But combine that twisted outlook with the propensity to try to take revenge... Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
An Al Jazeera reporter made an interesting point that the US media narrative seems heavy on the killers mental state as opposed to gun control. Raised the theory that the NRA successfully changed the media narrative after Sandy Hook.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:An Al Jazeera reporter made an interesting point that the US media narrative seems heavy on the killers mental state as opposed to gun control. Raised the theory that the NRA successfully changed the media narrative after Sandy Hook.
My theory is, this guy's mental problems are much more interesting than the last guy's.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: An Al Jazeera reporter made an interesting point that the US media narrative seems heavy on the killers mental state as opposed to gun control. Raised the theory that the NRA successfully changed the media narrative after Sandy Hook.
Yeah, they moved to doing that because they had stretched their previous bullshit ("Don't Politicize This Shooting It Would Be Disrespectful To The Families Give Us Time To Grieve Don't Make This Partisan") to the breaking point.
When mental illness should be PART of the conversation, they want to make it the distraction.
If Columbine had happened this year, it would have been just another shooting. Nothing noteworthy. Distract media, stall politicians, gridlock, move on.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
