Someone expresses surprise that a black woman is named "Antoniette" and you label him "racist" and "bigot". Can you show the logic? Can you show clearly how a reasonable person can infer from this that he hates people of a certain race, or would discriminate against them, or would shun or avoid them, would attack them or incite others to attack them, or do any of the things associated with racism or bigotry?
"Racist", "Bigot", "Discrimination".... These are strong allegations of a very serious nature against the character and reputation of a person. They can seriously damage a person's reputation and standing in society and cause him to come into public contempt, hatred and odium and cause other members of society to shun and avoid him. You are free to think as you like in private, but if you make such allegations in public, you had better be able to back it up in a Court of law, especially if the other party happens to be some important social, political or business figure. Otherwise you might find yourself at the expensive end of a libel suit.
What is in your "book" is unimportant. It is whether a reasonable person would think, based on the facts presented, that will determine whether your allegations will be upheld.
In your book, he is racist and that is up to you. But based on what has been shown here so far, I would submit you have not one shred of evidence to back up your accusations.
Of course, losing $$$ is no big deal if one is rich, one can always earn it back. But losing your credibility if you cannot back up your allegations, if ordinary, right thinking and reasonable members of society see that you make wild, spurious and unfounded allegations-- that is much harder to earn back.
Last edited by waileong; 25th September 2007 at 12:05 PM.
As an aside, our MM has been quoted more than once saying that "Chinese are congenital gamblers". Would DP or Garou12 like to write to the Straits Times and say that he is racist? It would be interesting to see whether such allegations can hold water.
Last edited by waileong; 25th September 2007 at 12:10 PM.
Racism & Bigotry are big words with very negative connotations. While I agree that what eejit has posted may have come across in a manner that is deem prejudicial to some, I would think that besides open condemnation, it would also do us well to reflect upon our own prejudices.
I am not sure how many of us here have heard about "Project Implicit" but here is a brief rundown;
The IAT (Implicit Association Test) is a tool in the development of theories of implicit social cognition, a body of results that suggest that many cognitive processes that affect behavior are unconscious in nature and are inaccessible to observation by the actor. These implicit processes affect perception, influence behavior, and color interpretation of past events. The IAT has been profiled in major media outlets (e.g. in the Washington Post) and in the popular book "Blink". The most prominent implicit association test is one that measures bias on race. Other popular tests look at gender and age bias.
One of the most famous IAT is the one by Havard which you can take here;
It would be wise not to be so quick to dismiss anyone else's world view because you may not be all that sure of your own under proper scrutiny.
What I would ask is that we move on since the message that we are trying to convey (i.e. racism/bogotry = bad) is being carried loud & clear and everything else is just your own world view. Again, take the Race IAT. You would be surprised at your own results.
Last edited by Wolfgang; 25th September 2007 at 11:56 AM.
weileong, what do you not understand.
Someone, seeing a french name, Antoniette, automatically assumed the person is French, automatically assumed that the person is white, and proclaimed surprises when seeing this person to be African.
Well, to me that is racism.
As I said it earlier, I will be this person some benefit of the doubt, but still said his comments are racist. What I really have a serious problem with is the people defending racism.
I'm not defending racism.
I'm against people who call others "racist", "bigoted" and can't back up their baseless allegations.
PS Someone expresses surprise and you automatically assume he is racist without a shred of evidence of any racist acts or tendencies. Isn't that worse?
Last edited by waileong; 25th September 2007 at 12:25 PM.
I think it is quite sufficient. I will not be closing this thread but i honestly think such back and forth dialogue will serve no purpose. Its obvious both parties have their own viewpoint and if neither party is willing to concede or budge, I really do not see this going anywhere.
I am once again asking both of you to let this go.
I am not trying to convince DP. He is beyond that. As you know, in any debate it is not the other party who matters, it is the audience's heart the debaters must win.
The purpose is to expose the fallacies in logic shown here by certain people, so that others on the sidelines are clear about what constitutes racism and bigotry.
Do you know what DP has said, by implication? That I support racists because I am defending them. And by further inference, I could also be racist myself.
That is a serious allegation.
I hope you can understand how serious such allegations are. Promising careers can be destroyed by allegations of racism. Companies can suffer boycotts because of such allegations. Even Presidents can fall from power due to such allegations.
This is why I am out so strongly against people who make baseless allegations of racism.
Last edited by waileong; 25th September 2007 at 01:13 PM.
This is interesting and I cannot help not putting my little grain of salt. I was bonr in one continent, my wife in another one and my son in a third one here in SG. My son does not look like his mother. We are exprecting a second child and it may be anything as my wife is already a huge mix. Could be milky, cafe late, Milo or .....
We are taking the bets.
I also cannot stand prejudice, stereotypes, bigotry and close minds.
To the TS.
It is true that some harmless sentences like the one of TS can hold more than they initialy intented. See the long discussion triggered by it here below.
So one must think twice before throwing some thoughts about sensitive issues. Race, religion and politics are sensitive enough for us to reflect twice before talking.
One day a Singaporean will not be like 76 % of the population. I can give you an example.
Do a search on "proudly singaporean". See what you get.
To Deadpoet and Wildstallion
I could not agree more with you guys but again let's not over react. After the second world war in Europe, people were easily accused of wrongdoing by the masses. (Like collaborating with the occupant or other things) They were prosecuted for nothing or almost nothing. It is too easy to crucify someone. I prefer to be innocent until proven guilty then the opposite.
As a wise man said here, we should inform rather then crucify.
Even if I do not agree with you, I will always fight for you to have your say.
Antoniette, I don't even know that is french
But I would be surprised to see an African too
Just like I thought Eikin is Japanese if he turned out to be Indian I would be surprised too.
Am I racist? I don't think so, as there is nothing wrong with Indians except....
never mind. It is just about have stereotypes, which we ALL have.
PS: yes I have been to france, I have seen so many Black people there but that doesn't alter my stereotypes which are formed when I am younger.