Letters to the Editor
-
you should double-down
Like trade-up or find some balance. Rascism is so pathetic. For variety find a fascist/Limb-bot, a sex addict or half a dozen Catholics. You could even run an ad in the local paper:
Couple seeks new companion, willing to trade one 60-ish rascist for various more interesting social stigma or religious zelotry.
You could then have auditions, and show your rascist friend the video. Hell, you might even be able to syndicate this.
-
use your own logic
You're right, culture is a mighty influence, mightier sometimes than race. So this guy comes from a rural, conservative culture that says black people are dumber, and he's backing himself up with personal experiences of culturally hampered black people.
Can you extend to him the grace you extend to the black folks he decries? How will he learn otherwise without your compassion? It's a sticky wicket but you're not going to change his mind with preaching, only by practicing.
-
actual damage vs sensibilities; tolerance?
Sorry I can't remember who said it and therefore won't aim my arrow specifically, but to the person who was calling it hypocritical to deny the friend the influence of his background but granting it to black people who are limited by their background, I would point out that it's not a fair comparison. For black people in America, life is still limited by racism - there is still discrimination in hiring (my ex-husband who works for the state employment office has MANY tales about that), education opportunities are still not equal (if you doubt me, read some Jonathan Kozol, for starters); they still have to move through a world where they are disliked by white people convinced they are managing to conceal it; neighborhoods predominantly black still have fewer shopping choices and fewer jobs available near home, and those stores, knowing they have a captive population, often charge more and the produce in grocery stores is less fresh; I read this morning that black people in emergency rooms are less likely to receive opiate pain medication than white people. This is just the tip of the iceberg, are REAL situations, that people spend lifetimes trying to negotiate and thrive in. The friend, on the other hand, was raised by a racist father, but he wasn't raised in a situation where HIS life choices or opportunities were cut off by society from day one, and frankly, I know a whole lot of people - there are many people on this board - who have rejected their parent's beliefs on the topic, and he's had decades to ask himselves the hard questions. No, we're not talking about the same thing at all.
Someone added the factor of tolerance of gay rights in schools vs Christian parents' right to teach their kids their values. Again, it's not really the same thing. People can think what they want but when those thoughts become manifested in ways that limit other people's lives then once again, we're talking about REAL damage vs sensibilities. Even on just a verbal level, it's not a belief vs belief battle; it's a belief vs "center of one's being" argument. Not the same.
Tolerance is a sticky point. In terms of everyone having human dignity and being worthy of respect, and acknowledging that none of us are perfect, etc. etc., yes, we need to tolerate each other. But going beyond that basic "right to live and be respected" level, we're talking about tolerance of who someone essentially is, people who belong to targeted groups, who only want to have equal treatment to others, as opposed to tolerance of those with ideas that go beyond themselves to how they'd treat others; those who, with enough tolerance, would put their thoughts into action and attempt to curtail others' lives. Yes, we must not be tolerant of the beliefs of those who would limit the opportunities of others. And don't say it isn't so - we have an enormously racist society even in an age when it's not okay to BE a racist. We've seen how bad it can be when it IS tolerated.
I think in terms of solidarity rather than tolerance - solidarity with the those who's actual lives are damaged by prejudice. I'm not in solidarity with those who carry around sensibilities which, in their essence, dehumanize other people.
-
it ain't what you believe, it's what you do
There are plenty of people who think "blacks aren't as intelligent as whites", yet seem to treat every single black person they meet as yet another exception to that rule, which applies only to all those black people "out there" that the media report on. Just for one example. Not what I'd prefer to have them think, but the damage they do is limited to voting Republican.
(of course, that leads inexorably to the fact that there are plenty of people who believe with all their heart in the equality of all mankind and that African Americans still get a raw deal and that that's something which needs to be remedied ASAP, and subconsciously treat black people who "act black" as though they had some sort of borderline contagious disease which might rub off on them and their family.)
-
You've got to be kidding me . . .
I am really disappointed with Cary's response and his appeals for moral relativism. Yes, we all have flaws and we are all fucked up to a certain degree. I have many issues that I feel passionately about and have friends that disagree on those issues. However, there is a big difference between saying that and making hateful assumptions about a whole race of people. I cannot comment on whether or not the LW should remain friends with the racist, as I do not personally know this person. Everyone has a set of things that are non-negotiable for them and it seems that the LW has to determine whether racism is one of them. However, Cary (and other commenters) conflating racism with other personality flaws is frankly the privilege of someone who is not directly impacted by it. Racism, specifically in the letter hatred towards blacks, has structured and continues to structure our society. It is simply deplorable to minimize the impact of the racist friend's words.