Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by LaminatorX on Wednesday March 11 2015, @04:53PM   Printer-friendly [Skip to comment(s)]
from the May-31-1921 dept.

The NYT reports that after a video was posted on YouTube that appeared to show members of the fraternity Sigma Alpha Epsilon at University of Oklahoma singing a racist chant, the organization’s board decided “with no mental reservation whatsoever that this chapter needed to be closed immediately.” The video shows a group of young white people in formal wear riding a bus and singing a chant laden with antiblack slurs and at least one reference to lynching. A grinning young man wearing a tuxedo and standing in the aisle of the bus pumps his fist in the air as he chants, while a young woman seated nearby claps. The chant vows that African-Americans will “never” be allowed to join the campus chapter.

The nine-second video was uploaded to YouTube on Sunday by a student group, the Unheard Movement, that first identified the people in it as members of Sigma Alpha Epsilon, although the group did not indicate how it obtained the video or when it was filmed. University president, David Boren, said in an emailed statement that the administration was also investigating the video. “I have just been informed of the video, which purports to show students to show students engaging in a racist chant. We are investigating to determine if the video involved OU students. If O.U. students are involved, this behavior will not be tolerated and will be addressed very quickly,” said Boren. “This behavior is reprehensible and contrary to all of our values.” Students marched on the campus of the University of Oklahoma on Monday to protest the video.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @04:57PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @04:57PM (#156154)

    The chant vows that African-Americans will “never” be allowed to join the campus chapter.

    Since that chapter no longer exists and thus nobody is allowed to join it, I'd say the prediction has come true. Just in a different way than they thought. :-)

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by VLM on Wednesday March 11 2015, @05:10PM

      by VLM (445) on Wednesday March 11 2015, @05:10PM (#156160)

      Its also interesting that the protests are strictly due to the video.

      They're cool with certain races never being allowed to join.

      White people having weird-ass party themes with blackface stereotypes is no problem or BAU.

      Nobody is even protesting their beliefs or attitudes.

      But record a chant and upload to youtube, then, and only then, do the SJW knives come out. But only to protest the video itself.

      Its like gun crime where they only blame the gun. Some urban weirdos have the same attitude towards cars and drunk driving.

      Strange world out there.

      • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @05:35PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @05:35PM (#156169)

        > But record a chant and upload to youtube, then, and only then, do the SJW knives come out.

        Er, no. The "SJW knives" have been out. It's the deniers that keep them from being effective. The conservative belief structure regarding race in the US is that racism is over. So when such a blatant contradiction of that ideology becomes a national event, the conservatives finally get on board and action is finally allowed, even ram-rodded.

        • (Score: 4, Disagree) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday March 11 2015, @09:18PM

          Has nothing to do with being conservative, just not being an SJW. You only react to racism when you actually see it or you end up just making shit like Institutional Racism up to justify running around being a dickhead all the time.

          --
          My rights don't end where your fear begins.
          • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @10:45PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @10:45PM (#156351)

            You may not call it racism but there is discrimination that is not easily seen. Identical resumes get evaluated differently based on the name on the top. Missing out on a job opportunity because your name is Jamal or Tashanique is a very real possibility in the US.

            • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @10:52PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @10:52PM (#156358)

              That's just reputation at play, not racism. After an employer hires one Jamal who doesn't show up for work, and another Jamal who speaks incomprehensibly at work, and another Jamal who consumes drugs at work, and another Jamal who steals equipment from work, and yet another Jamal who swears at customers, and finally a Jamal who wears his pants around his ankles, that employer will be very hesitant to hire yet another Jamal! It's not the employer's fault that pretty much every Jamal out there has the same skin color. When the employer sees the name Jamal on a resume, the employer will think about the numerous past bad experiences hiring people named Jamal, and will choose not to go down that road once more.

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @03:48AM

                by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @03:48AM (#156486)
                And what about the 5 Johns or Janes that are absolute shit employees as well. They just blend into the background, since the next John or Jane that applies doesn't have that baggage on their resumes, no?
            • (Score: 4, Troll) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday March 11 2015, @10:53PM

              As well it should be. It says that you come from parents who are morons and have a high likelihood of being one yourself.

              --
              My rights don't end where your fear begins.
              • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Ezber Bozmak on Wednesday March 11 2015, @11:16PM

                by Ezber Bozmak (764) on Wednesday March 11 2015, @11:16PM (#156375)

                As well it should be. It says that you come from parents who are morons and have a high likelihood of being one yourself.

                That is a point worth repeating.

                Judging someone for having a stereotypical black american name rather than the content of their resume is absolutely not racism.
                Really.

                • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @11:21PM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @11:21PM (#156379)

                  Have you ever seen the resumes that these people will give businesses? I wish I was joking, but we're talking about resumes written on McDonalds napkins, with the letters of their name written backwards, containing just the person's first name, a phone number, and a list of work experience that consists solely of "i has old jobs".

                  They aren't turned down based on name alone. They're turned down because their resumes have ketchup and mustard stains on them.

                • (Score: 4, Troll) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday March 11 2015, @11:48PM

                  Naming your kid Shoniqua or Tyreson is not a black thing. It is a moron thing. Those names simply did not happen here until recently some jackasses decided George and Bill just weren't black enough for them and decided to give the finger to whitey and his names. Giving someone the finger is bloody stupid if you expect them to then hire you.

                  --
                  My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Ezber Bozmak on Thursday March 12 2015, @12:32AM

                    by Ezber Bozmak (764) on Thursday March 12 2015, @12:32AM (#156431)

                    Those names simply did not happen here until recently some jackasses decided George and Bill just weren't black enough for them and decided to give the finger to whitey and his names. Giving someone the finger is bloody stupid if you expect them to then hire you.

                    Quoted for truth.
                    It is not racist at all to make people choose between a cultural identity and a job.
                    It is actually black people getting what they deserve for being racist against whites.
                    The names given to their ancestors by their owners ought to be good enough for anyone.

                    • (Score: 3, Funny) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday March 12 2015, @01:14AM

                      Your words not mine, slappy. I'll stand by what I've said to the last word but only to what I've said.

                      --
                      My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                      • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Ezber Bozmak on Thursday March 12 2015, @01:48AM

                        by Ezber Bozmak (764) on Thursday March 12 2015, @01:48AM (#156453)

                        Your words not mine, slappy. I'll stand by what I've said to the last word but only to what I've said.

                        Since my words don't mean what your words mean, surely you can describe where the meanings differ. After making the effort to share your opinions with everyone here, you wouldn't want people to think they are racist opinions. That would be counter-productive since you are proving how racism against black people is a figment of the misinformed imagination.

                        • (Score: 3) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday March 12 2015, @03:18AM

                          Sure, I'll bite. My beef is not with a skin color but with the utter stupidity of naming your child something nobody can spell or pronounce given three guesses. I don't care if you're bloody purple and come from somewhere left of the Crab Nebula if your name's Bill or Susan.

                          --
                          My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                          • (Score: 2) by Ezber Bozmak on Thursday March 12 2015, @03:44AM

                            by Ezber Bozmak (764) on Thursday March 12 2015, @03:44AM (#156481)

                            My beef is not with a skin color but with the utter stupidity of naming your child something nobody can spell or pronounce given three guesses.

                            Thank you. Now I know that racism is only ever about the color of a person's skin and not their culture.

                            Chosing a bantu-origin name like Shaniqua [20000-names.com] for a black baby is utterly stupid. If you want to be able to work and support yourself, needing to conform to another race's naming standards is absolutely not racist.

                            • (Score: 3) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday March 12 2015, @04:00AM

                              If you didn't know that before, you're a fool. Did the spelling of the word not give it away? How about the dictionary definition?

                              Culture? You either adapt to the culture of the nation you live in or you have a shit life. Period. Not the culture of any race but of the nation you live in. In the US, that means you do not get a white collar job being named Bufanaquishria. In South Africa or Japan, that means you're going to have a hell of a time if you're named Steve. That my pedantic and quite silly friend is life on planet Earth. You should probably try getting used to the rules; they're not going to change for you.

                              --
                              My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                              • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Ezber Bozmak on Thursday March 12 2015, @04:48AM

                                by Ezber Bozmak (764) on Thursday March 12 2015, @04:48AM (#156499)

                                Now I know that racism is only ever about the color of a person's skin and not their culture

                                If you didn't know that before, you're a fool. Did the spelling of the word not give it away? How about the dictionary definition?

                                Thank you for teaching me the truth. Race is purely biological. [vox.com] That's why those names aren't black - they are names, how they can have biology? The Oxford English Dictionary really makes my error clear when it says that race is "a group of people sharing the same culture, history, language, etc" [oxforddictionaries.com]

                                You should probably try getting used to the rules; they're not going to change for you.

                                Preach it brother! When people refer to America as a melting pot, they mean only for the melting of white chocolate. That's why American English would never incorporate words from other languages. [wikipedia.org]

                                And thanks for the tip about avoiding the name Steve in South Africa. If only your sociological expertise had been there to save another fool from the error of his name. [wikipedia.org]

                      • (Score: 5, Insightful) by pnkwarhall on Thursday March 12 2015, @01:58AM

                        by pnkwarhall (4558) on Thursday March 12 2015, @01:58AM (#156456)

                        All the "+1 Funny" mods on buzzard's comments in this thread, along with the lack of support for Ezber's points, have given me a window into the nature of some of the users of this site. And it's not a pretty view.

                        Don't get me wrong--I'm white, and I have laughed at comments poking fun at names like "Shaniqua" and the mutilated spellings, etc. But to support this by modding up these comments in a serious thread about how **the name someone's parent gave them** can affect their career opportunities is not something I support, and I'm ashamed to see on Soylent. SJW or not, making fun of someone for something they have no control over is not something I want in my environment.

                        --
                        Lift Yr Skinny Fists Like Antennas to Heaven
                        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @02:15AM

                          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @02:15AM (#156463)

                          I've modded his comments up because I like my bigots loud and proud so we can all see them for what they are. I believe that since he posted them for all to see, he wants to have his character judged on his words. As he said, he stands by them.

                          I can't say why anyone else modded them up, but I would be disappointed to see them hidden from the general audience here.

                          Besides, with all the whining about mod-bombing I thought I'd take it in a different direction.

                          • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday March 12 2015, @03:13AM

                            Well, I suppose I am a bigot but not a racial one. My hatred is pretty much reserved for stupidity, greed, intolerance, and elitist attitudes.

                            --
                            My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @05:56AM

                              by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @05:56AM (#156515)

                              >> Naming your kid Shoniqua or Tyreson is not a black thing. It is a moron thing.
                              >> stupidity of naming your child something nobody can spell or pronounce
                              >> parents who are morons and have a high likelihood of being one yourself.

                              > My hatred is pretty much reserved for stupidity, greed, intolerance, and elitist attitudes

                              It is pretty elitist and stupid to judge someone a moron because you can't pronounce their name.

                              Is all your sputtering about racism actually self-hate?
                              In the same way that the most strident anti-gay conservatives are invariably secretly gay themselves, the rhetoric just being an outward manifestation of their inner struggle; publicly condemning their true self in a futile attempt to squash who they really are for fear of being shunned by their friends and family. You must have a lot to lose.

                              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @09:22AM

                                by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @09:22AM (#156561)

                                In the same way that the most strident anti-gay conservatives are invariably secretly gay themselves, the rhetoric just being an outward manifestation of their inner struggle; publicly condemning their true self in a futile attempt to squash who they really are for fear of being shunned by their friends and family. You must have a lot to lose.

                                In the same way the most strident anti-racist humans are invariably secretly racist themselves, the rhetoric just being an outward manifestation of their inner struggle; publicly condemning their true self in a futile attempt to squash who they really are for fear of being shunned by their friends and family. You must have a lot to lose.

                                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @01:54PM

                                  by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @01:54PM (#156664)

                                  > In the same way the most strident anti-racist humans are invariably secretly racist themselves,

                                  Absolutely, but I wouldn't say its a secret. Recognizing that we are all at least a little bit racist is a pretty important step in understanding the human condition. We all prefer what we know, it is human nature and before we had a sophisticated civilization it was actually a useful characteristic because it encouraged tribal cohesiveness.

                                  The difference is that condemning racism is not a selfish act. Denying equal rights to others be they gay or just another culture, is extremely selfish.

                              • (Score: 1, Troll) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday March 12 2015, @12:09PM

                                Nah, I dig me. It's the rest of you lot who suck.

                                --
                                My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                        • (Score: 1) by Nugoo on Thursday March 12 2015, @03:49PM

                          by Nugoo (2584) on Thursday March 12 2015, @03:49PM (#156743)

                          Thank you for saying this. I'm half-black, half-white. My parents gave me my white mother's last name instead of my father's precisely to help me deal with TheMightyBuzzard's peculiar brand of bigotry. Seeing someone say my parents would have been morons to give me my father's last name, and then seeing that drivel get modded up is sickening. Not the sort of thing that inspires participation in a community.

                          By the way, when I think of names that are native to North America, I don't think of George and Bill.

                          --
                          I explicitly place the above in the public domain.
                          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @04:06PM

                            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @04:06PM (#156753)

                            As a guy who modded some of those posts up so that the bigotry could be more widely seen for what it is, I apologize for making it seem like an endorsement. I was hoping that we would see copious use of the disagree mod in response since that registers disapproval without making the whole thing disappear.

                            But at least the up-mods on pnkwarhall's post show solidarity against it.

                • (Score: 2) by mojo chan on Thursday March 12 2015, @11:56AM

                  by mojo chan (266) on Thursday March 12 2015, @11:56AM (#156624)

                  Judging someone for having a stereotypical black american name rather than the content of their resume is absolutely not racism.

                  It is, because the assumption is that "stereotypically black" names are stupid, implying that the culture they come from is stupid. I've seen plenty of otherwise seemingly intelligent people with good jobs give their kids stupid names. Oliver and Noah are both in the top 5 UK boys names for crying out loud, both a sure fire way to get your kid bullied at school. I'd argue that naming your kid after a fictional character who survived God's biggest ever genocide isn't a particularly smart move, not least because he was a drunk. Seriously, the first thing he did after the flood was plant a vineyard and get pissed.

                  You are projecting all your prejudices onto what you consider to be "stereotypically black" names. How about Obama? Actually, his middle name is Hussain... Any thoughts on stereotypically Islamic names?

                  --
                  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
              • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Thursday March 12 2015, @03:04AM

                by Grishnakh (2831) on Thursday March 12 2015, @03:04AM (#156476)

                There's nothing wrong with a name like Jamal. Malcolm-Jamal Warner is a noted actor who starred in the great series "Jeremiah" for instance (as well as the Cosby Show).

                Now something like "Sharkeisha", "Rotunda", "Shanqueesha", or even "Obamaneisha" is just a sign of really bad parenting. But it's not just black people: white people are doing the same stupid shit, with names like "Donathan", "Havoc", "Rysk", "Blayde", "Yoga", "Kaixin", "Brook'Lynn", "Harvest", or "Luxx".

                Americans as a whole have gone off the deep end with idiotic names for their kids.

                • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday March 12 2015, @03:10AM

                  And that's the damned truth.

                  --
                  My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                • (Score: 2) by mojo chan on Thursday March 12 2015, @12:02PM

                  by mojo chan (266) on Thursday March 12 2015, @12:02PM (#156626)

                  The UK is getting there too. I have met kids called Diesel and Dann-nay.

                  --
                  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @03:24PM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @03:24PM (#156722)

                  A labor an delivery nurse told me one new mamma was going to name her baby girl 'Clamidia' because she liked the way it sounded. (She did listen to good advice and picked another name)

                  • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Thursday March 12 2015, @03:57PM

                    by Grishnakh (2831) on Thursday March 12 2015, @03:57PM (#156749)

                    My wife was told a similar story (and this was back in the 80s I think) of a black couple who wanted to name their new daughter "Vagina" because they liked the way it sounded. They changed their mind after someone informed them what the word meant....

                    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @04:13PM

                      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @04:13PM (#156755)

                      Hooray for racist urban legends!

                      Betty had just given birth to a daughter, and she was discussing the choice of a name with her roommate, who was equally clueless. Mulling over the possibilities, Betty considered a word that she'd recently heard on the obstetric ward. "Vagina, that be a nice name . . . hmm, I think I'll call her 'Vagina.'" Admittedly a euphonious word, the two women agreed that "Vagina" would indeed be a nice name for a girl.

                      When the time came to relay the name choice to one of the hospital's personnel, the shocked worker exclaimed, "Uh, you can't name her 'Vagina'!" To which the Mom replied, "I be her mother, and I can name her whatever I wants to!" This prompted the worker to explain just what a vagina was, but the Mom was skeptical. "That ain't a vagina — it's a cootchie!"

                      Also this: http://www.babynamewizard.com/archives/2009/10/ledasha-legends-and-race-part-one [babynamewizard.com]

                      • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Thursday March 12 2015, @05:54PM

                        by Grishnakh (2831) on Thursday March 12 2015, @05:54PM (#156806)

                        It isn't racist if it's true.

                        This story is secondhand (thirdhand?), but comes from a former friend of my wife. When he was in the hospital and his girlfriend/wife was having his first son, the couple in the room next door were talking about naming their kid "Vagina". This isn't just something I read somewhere, it's a friend-of-a-friend personal account.

                        Do you really think it's impossible, out of a few hundred million people in this country, that some people would actually pick this as a name?

                        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @06:06PM

                          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @06:06PM (#156815)

                          > it's a friend-of-a-friend personal account.

                          Are you trolling me? Are you honestly not aware that FOAF is practically the mascot of urban legends? [wikipedia.org]
                          You couldn't have done a better job of proving it isn't true if you had tried.

                          • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Friday March 13 2015, @03:56AM

                            by Grishnakh (2831) on Friday March 13 2015, @03:56AM (#157125)

                            Well considering I know the guy, I'm not going to call him a liar.

              • (Score: 2) by aristarchus on Thursday March 12 2015, @04:38AM

                by aristarchus (2645) on Thursday March 12 2015, @04:38AM (#156496) Journal

                As well it should be. It says that you come from parents who are morons and have a high likelihood of being one yourself.

                Not at all accurate! Most "very smart" people are the children of complete morons. And conversely, as noted by Plato in the dialogue Meno, spawn of great persons tend to be complete morons. (Exampla Gratia, or e.g.: GW Bush, no wait, that doesn't work either) Which leads us to two questions: One: can virtue be taught? (Plato's question) and Two: who would name their child "Mighty Buzzard"? (my question)

                --
                You are currently banned from moderating. The last day of your ban is 2022-03-25.
                • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday March 12 2015, @05:37AM

                  Bit late to the party, ar. It's past my bedtime or I'd play with you some.

                  --
                  My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                  • (Score: 2) by aristarchus on Thursday March 12 2015, @07:32AM

                    by aristarchus (2645) on Thursday March 12 2015, @07:32AM (#156533) Journal

                    Ya know, Buzz, I feel we are kindred souls. I have roots in the Nations. And that is what makes your hardline libertarian position incomprehensible to me. I have patience, however. I can wait till you wake up, and explain it to me. Of course the recent behavior of the Re-constituted Cherokee nation, as regards their former slaves, leaves me less than optimistic. But, explain it to me.

                    --
                    You are currently banned from moderating. The last day of your ban is 2022-03-25.
                    • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday March 12 2015, @12:07PM

                      Really have no idea on that. Never looked into the Cherokee side of my ancestry very deep since I'm up to my eyeballs in the Chickasaw bits. I expect they were just bastards like the colonials but I'm not going to apologize for them any more than I'm going to apologize for the white bits of my ancestry. If your grandparents couldn't remember it because they weren't born yet, it's time to get the hell over it.

                      --
                      My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @02:12PM

                      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @02:12PM (#156670)

                      > And that is what makes your hardline libertarian position incomprehensible to me.
                      > I have patience, however. I can wait till you wake up, and explain it to me

                      I doubt that he can explain it.

                      Whenever he gets pinned down by his own logic out come the empty slogans like, "I stand by my words," "I make no apologies," and "I have the strength of my convictions." He also tends to start calling people names when he is uncomfortable. And of course accusing people of being an "SJW" is a favorite tactic, it lets him dismiss ideas he dislikes without having to actually refute them. If you are lucky, he'll reveal himself by outright denying an obvious fact. As above when he said racism has nothing to do with culture, because dictionaries. A couple of days back he literally said that being white confers no benefit, tangible or otherwise, in american society. The coup de grace is ultimately blame shifting which boiled down is always: "I'm not racist, society is, so suck it up you whiner."

                      He is living the unexamined life.

                • (Score: 2) by art guerrilla on Thursday March 12 2015, @11:16AM

                  by art guerrilla (3082) on Thursday March 12 2015, @11:16AM (#156617)

                  pedant alert: exempli gratia

                  key & peel have a running gag that mocks 'black names' that is pretty funny; AND did an inverse schtick where a black 'inner city' substitute teacher pronounces 'white names' in a 'black style'... joshua becomes 'joe-shhh-eu-a', aaron become 'a-a-ron', etc...
                  they are two funny dudes...

                  also, no such thing as 'race', a man-made idea to otherize people...
                  we're all the same dog, dog; just poodles who don't want to be the same as mutts, dog...

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @06:01PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @06:01PM (#156812)

                It says that you come from parents who are morons and have a high likelihood of being one yourself.

                what kind of mental contortion does it take to proclaim yourself "an individualist above all else" who "believes everyone should be judged solely on their own merits and failings." [soylentnews.org] and then turn around and judge a person's abilities based on the actions of their parents?

                • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday March 12 2015, @09:22PM

                  Simple, the name is the only truthful thing on a resume unless they accidentally forgot to embellish the fuck out of something.

                  --
                  My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @10:28PM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @10:28PM (#156967)

                    solely on their own merits and failings.
                    solely

            • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @11:38PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @11:38PM (#156390)

              > Identical resumes get evaluated differently based on the name on the top.

              The 50 percent gap in callback rates is statistically very significant, Bertrand and Mullainathan note in Are Emily and Greg More Employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination (NBER Working Paper No. 9873). [nber.org] It indicates that a white name yields as many more callbacks as an additional eight years of experience. Race, the authors add, also affects the reward to having a better resume. Whites with higher quality resumes received 30 percent more callbacks than whites with lower quality resumes. But the positive impact of a better resume for those with Africa-American names was much smaller.
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @07:37PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @07:37PM (#156855)

            > You only react to racism when you actually see it or you end up just making shit like Institutional Racism up

            The idea that if cause and effect aren't easily witnessed together then it isn't real must be some kind of conservative object permanence failing.

            Smoking doesn't cause cancer.
            Lead poisoning doesn't cause dementia.
            Over-eating doesn't make people fat.
            Sex doesn't create babies.
            And the transitive property is a liberal lie by elitist mathematicians who just want to be dickheads.

            • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday March 12 2015, @09:41PM

              Smoking doesn't cause cancer, it increases the likelihood of it. That's beside the point though.

              If you can not prove racism, you have no business punishing anyone for being racist. This is America and we damned well do not convict on suspicion here. Show me proof of an individual in power discriminating against people based on skin color or gender and I'll be right there along side you calling for his ass to be fired. Tell me an institution is racist and I'm going to call bullshit because institutions are not a real thing, they're a handy abstraction used to identify groups of individuals. Just like races are. You want to end racism, encourage individualism. It is the opposite of racism. It is impossible to be both a racist and an individualist because racism requires you first accept some degree of collectivism so that you can treat a race as a group.

              --
              My rights don't end where your fear begins.
              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @10:02PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @10:02PM (#156949)

                This is America and we damned well do not convict on suspicion here.

                There are many people, black and white, who would disagree with you.
                http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/black-boy-executed-s-conviction-overturned-article-1.2048611 [nydailynews.com]
                And then go read
                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overturned_convictions_in_the_United_States [wikipedia.org]

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @10:54PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @10:54PM (#156989)

                > institutions are not a real thing, they're a handy abstraction

                And bodies are not a real thing either, just a handy abstraction used to identify a group of individual cells.
                Tell me a person is racist, I'm going to call bullshit, its just some individual cells that are racist.
                All the other cells have nothing to do with it.
                Want to end racism? Encourage individual cells to be their own cells, and quit it with that collectivism.

                • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday March 13 2015, @01:01AM

                  Have fun with that reductio ad absurdum? You failed at it by the way. The individual is both the smallest and largest entity that may hold a view on anything and the only type of entity that can serve a prison time for crimes committed. Abstractions are fine for debate and coming to general conclusions, they are not fine for the actual solving of problems. That has to happen on an individual level or it will not happen at all.

                  --
                  My rights don't end where your fear begins.
      • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:00PM

        by DeathMonkey (1380) on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:00PM (#156183) Journal

        Its also interesting that the protests are strictly due to the video.
         
        1. Even codes of conduct have some standard of required evidence.
         
        2. What protests? The word "protest" does not appear in either of the linked articles.

        • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday March 11 2015, @09:12PM

          by FatPhil (863) <reversethis-{if.fdsa} {ta} {tnelyos-cp}> on Wednesday March 11 2015, @09:12PM (#156306) Homepage
          I see the word protest in TFS and in TFA at the end of TFL referenced in the sentence of the TFS which mentions protests. Twice in the first two sentences, no less.
          --
          I know I'm God, because every time I pray to him, I find I'm talking to myself.
    • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @05:39PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @05:39PM (#156171)

      I'm from Australia, so I don't fully get American race relations, but are there not black fraternities and sororities? Why are those race-specific organisations considered acceptable, while ones for whites or other groups aren't?

      • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @05:47PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @05:47PM (#156175)

        It is about power. Race in america is a proxy for power. There are obviously exceptions to the rule, like Obama. But to cite Obama as proof that power is racially egalitarian in the US would be like citing Benazir Bhutto [wikipedia.org] as proof that Pakistan doesn't have a problem with repressing women.

        The day power isn't concentrated by race in the US is the day the whites-only power clubs won't be a problem. Then we'll just have rich-only power clubs. Progress!

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @05:59PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @05:59PM (#156181)

          As an outsider, I don't see how what you just wrote holds true in this case. Is it not the whites who have had their group terminated, while similar groups for blacks are deemed acceptable? How were the whites anything but completely powerless in this case? A group with power would not have been terminated, no?

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:02PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:02PM (#156185)

            Power is not binary.
            The power of one tiny but blatantly racist white group is less than the power of the entire university, or really the nation at large since this is such a big media event.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @09:20PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @09:20PM (#156318)

          The idea that a group's racism is okay simply because the group was oppressed and therefore lacks power is simply insane. Racism is bad regardless of who does it.

          • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @10:49PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @10:49PM (#156354)

            Yes, racism is bad but it is worse when there is more power behind it. A racist judge/cop/boss has a lot more influence over people's lives than a racist janitor.

      • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:02PM

        by DeathMonkey (1380) on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:02PM (#156186) Journal

        I'm from Australia, so I don't fully get American race relations, but are there not black fraternities and sororities?
         
        I don't think there actually are any. There are historicall black fraternities and sororities but I don't think there are any that actually prohibit whites.
         
        If anyone disagrees please cite your source.

        • (Score: 2) by ikanreed on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:07PM

          by ikanreed (3164) on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:07PM (#156191) Journal

          Considering that fraternaties represent housing, I'm pretty sure it's outright illegal to discriminate or suggest that you discriminate against a number of protected classes(race being one of those classes). Which means, legally speaking, predominantly black fraternaties can't prohibit white people from joining.

        • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @10:06PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @10:06PM (#156337)

          Technically, nothing in this frat actually stated "White Only" They just didn't accept anything else. Who is to say that doesn't happen elsewhere.

      • (Score: 5, Interesting) by jmorris on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:03PM

        by jmorris (4844) on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:03PM (#156187)

        Shut up, they explain.

        You have to be a Doubleplus Good DoubleThinker to understand American politics.

        Al Sharpton isn't a racist. If you think he is, you are mistaken; it is just your own racist thinking. Blacks build entire organizations around themselves, only allowing their own to be members, distributing various benefits based entirely on race. None of this is racist. It is in fact racist to even notice this. There are entire organizations which only admit females and distribute benefits based entirely on sex. It is sexist to notice this.

        Dr. King said he dreams of a day when everyone will be judged on the quality of their ideas and not the color of their skin. He is a Great Hero and most assuredly not a racist. Newt Gingrich agreed with him, proving he is a racist.

        • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:44PM

          by DeathMonkey (1380) on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:44PM (#156224) Journal

          Dr. King said he dreams of a day when everyone will be judged on the quality of their ideas and not the color of their skin.
           
          We have evaluated the quality of this idea and have found it lacking:The video shows men on a charter bus singing a chant indicating that black students, which the men refer to with a racial slur in the chant, could not "sign" with the fraternity. The chant also alluded to lynchings.
           
          There are plenty of other predominantly white fraternities. It must only be a matter of time before they are banned due to the color of their skin, right?

          • (Score: 5, Insightful) by jmorris on Wednesday March 11 2015, @07:25PM

            by jmorris (4844) on Wednesday March 11 2015, @07:25PM (#156262)

            Hey, those guys were idiots, don't think we are likely to get an argument on that. Anybody who doesn't know everybody and their dog has a camera on their person and still does something that epicaly retarded deserves most of what is going to drop on them the next decade of their miserable lives.

            But it is still helpful to point out the DoubleThink going on. If we all agree what they did was outside the bounds of generally acceptable social behavior then why is the United Negro College Fund still around? They are a tax deductable charitable organization that is explicitly racist. Other examples abound.

            The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race. White people will soon drop below 50% of the U.S. population, so unless you are ready to accept a similar organization for them when they become a minority it is time to bring them all to an end. So which is it, was David Duke's National Accociation for the Advancement of White People was simply ahead of its time or is there a clearly defined principle to be pointed to saying why he was wrong? You can make reasoned and logically consistent arguments either way, that both are morally acceptable or that neither is, but there is no way to split that baby to permit the current practice to continue.

            • (Score: 5, Informative) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday March 11 2015, @07:44PM

              by DeathMonkey (1380) on Wednesday March 11 2015, @07:44PM (#156270) Journal

              But it is still helpful to point out the DoubleThink going on. If we all agree what they did was outside the bounds of generally acceptable social behavior then why is the United Negro College Fund still around? They are a tax deductable charitable organization that is explicitly racist. Other examples abound.
               
                From the UNCF FAQ: [uncf.org]
               
                Does UNCF help only African Americans?
               
              Not at all. UNCF's member colleges and universities admit students without reference to race or ethnicity. UNCF's largest scholarship program, the Gates Millennium Scholars Program, supports Hispanic American, Asian/Pacific American and Native American students as well as African Americans.
               
               
              Maybe you should find one of these abundant examples that actually applies...

              • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @07:52PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @07:52PM (#156272)

                supports Hispanic American, Asian/Pacific American and Native American students as well as African Americans.

                But not white people, so this really doesn't counter his argument.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @10:55PM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @10:55PM (#156361)

                  Is a white person who was born in North America to parents who were born in North America to grandparents who were born in North America to greatgrandparents who were born in North America to greatgreatgrandparents who were born in North America to greatgreatgreatgrandparents who were born in North America considered to be a Native American?

              • (Score: 3, Insightful) by khedoros on Wednesday March 11 2015, @11:04PM

                by khedoros (2921) on Wednesday March 11 2015, @11:04PM (#156369)

                UNCF's member colleges and universities admit students without reference to race or ethnicity.

                OK, sounds good. It should apply to everyone with strong academic qualifications who is in financial need, "without reference to race or ethnicity". That's a worthy goal.

                Hispanic American, Asian/Pacific American and Native American students as well as African Americans.

                Numerically, whites in poverty in the U.S. account for 41.6% of Americans under the poverty line (according to this, anyhow [kff.org]). But, wait, let's look at the Gates Millennium Scholars Program (as mentioned, the largest UNCF-administrated scholarship program):

                What are the eligibility criteria for the GMS Program?

                Students are eligible to be considered for a GMS scholarship if they: Are African American, American Indian/Alaska Native*, Asian Pacific Islander American** or Hispanic American

                That seems to directly contradict the first statement of inclusiveness. I don't have a problem with them providing scholarships to students of their choice. I do have a problem with weasel-wording to make it sound like they include all students in need, when they don't. At least I can take solace in the fact that my son has heritage from several of their white-listed categories of race, in case my financial position degrades by the time he's looking at college.

      • (Score: 2) by cmn32480 on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:04PM

        by cmn32480 (443) <{cmn32480} {at} {soylentnews.org}> on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:04PM (#156189) Journal

        First, let me say that what these people did was idiocy of an impressive magnitude.

        Second, you are correct.

        Any white only, especially white men only, organization is frowned upon. For any other group, the race specificity is generally ignored.

        There is a double standard. There are certainly black fraternities that, while it is not an official policy, I would wager do not initiate white members.

        My burning question is what dumbass actually filmed it and posted it to a public forum????

        Short version: It isn't something that people get pissed about until it shows up on Youtube, but it is there on all sides of the race coin.

        --
        "It's a dog eat dog world, and I'm wearing Milkbone underwear" - Norm Peterson
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:17PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:17PM (#156197)

        They are not aloud to discriminate. If it can be shown that they do then the fraternity or sorority will be closed.
        Same goes for religious fraternities and sororities. I knew multiple Christian girls that were in a Jewish sorority.

        • (Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @09:35PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @09:35PM (#156327)

          They are not aloud to discriminate.

          What if they do it quietly?

      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:22PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:22PM (#156198)

        White people in America don't need to stick together to mitigate systemic racism that harms their access to education, justice, or social/economic/political power. Black people do.

        White people sticking together is typically more about propagating the systemic racism that harms other ethnicities' access to education, justice, or social/economic/political power.

      • (Score: 2) by GungnirSniper on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:58PM

        by GungnirSniper (1671) on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:58PM (#156243) Journal

        White people in America generally don't think of themselves as white first but as Italians, Irish, etc. I'd say Hispanics are generally similar, being Mexican, Puerto Rican, etc. Blacks and Jews generally don't have large enough sub-groups so they go with those labels instead.

        There's also a heavy media and cultural bias that anything that is Whites' Only is an evil throwback to the Ku Klux Klan and can only exist for the purposes of oppressing others. It is similar to why Men's Only organizations are pretty rare outside of the Masons.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:32PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:32PM (#156211)

      > The chant vows that African-Americans will “never” be allowed to join the campus chapter.

      Something kinda weird about that.
      The house mother says she had pictures of the token black SAE member, who graduated about a decade previously, on the table in the entryway of the house. [cnn.com]
      Did these kids never see his picture there?

  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Ethanol-fueled on Wednesday March 11 2015, @05:02PM

    by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Wednesday March 11 2015, @05:02PM (#156155) Homepage

    As somebody who is sometimes racist, I think that the video is disgusting.

    Throwing parties in blackface while eating fried chicken and drinking malt liquor, or dressed up as Mexicans wearing sombreros, or Asians wearing gongs on their heads, I'm cool with that.

    But I am not cool with calling for the killing and banning of people. That kind of shit wasn't cool in '60's Alabama and it isn't cool now anywhere. What the fuck were those idiots thinking?

    I hope those fools get the shit beat out of them. If not for their hatred, for their stupidity.

    • (Score: 4, Funny) by cmn32480 on Wednesday March 11 2015, @05:19PM

      by cmn32480 (443) <{cmn32480} {at} {soylentnews.org}> on Wednesday March 11 2015, @05:19PM (#156164) Journal

      Is being sometimes racist like being a little pregnant?

      --
      "It's a dog eat dog world, and I'm wearing Milkbone underwear" - Norm Peterson
      • (Score: 5, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @05:49PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @05:49PM (#156177)

        You can have degrees easily.

        (What he said) - Ok with making fun of racial and cultural traits.

        Being Archie Bunker - Thinking a group is worthless and ranting about it

        Going KKK - Attacking individual members of the group, engaging in institutional attacks on the group (Examples include segregation, blocking voting, unequal in court/law (no matter what the letter says))

        The first two are free speech issues. The first doesn't concern me except that it often goes with the others.
        The second is best countered with ridicule and public scorn.
        The third is morally repugnant, and needs to be opposed and punished at every turn.

      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by bob_super on Wednesday March 11 2015, @05:50PM

        by bob_super (1357) on Wednesday March 11 2015, @05:50PM (#156178)

        I'll just leave this here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbud8rLejLM [youtube.com]

      • (Score: 2) by Jeremiah Cornelius on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:00PM

        by Jeremiah Cornelius (2785) on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:00PM (#156184) Journal

        "Little bit racist" here seems to mean: "I'm xenophopic, with an insecurity that sees difference in people as a form of opposition and threat. Therefore, I transfer my fear and mistrust into aggression and denigration of the unfamiliar or different. I armor myself by inflating tropes and stereotypes without either critical self-examination or honest investigation of context, history and broader sociology and psychology. But I don't want to kill anybody because of it. My cowardice isn't driving that level of panic."

        --
        You're betting on the pantomime horse...
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:08PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:08PM (#156193)

          The Aussie here again. I take it that you are a white American male? Would you ever live in a predominantly black area of an American city for a prolonged period of time? I often read white Americans writing that they 'are not racist', but at the same time they would not be willing to live in a black neighborhood. Would not there be less segregated cities in America if more whites lived in blaxk neighborhoods?

          • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:27PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:27PM (#156203)

            Black neighborhoods are typically poor neighborhoods. Poor neighborhoods typically have higher crime, lower property values, and worse public schools. Even successful minorities (not that minorities are immune to bias) will avoid poor neighborhoods due to the problems associated with them.

          • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:27PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:27PM (#156204)

            Since predominately black neighborhoods are also predominately poor neighborhoods, you aren't going to see many people voluntarily moving to them, regardless of race.

            Go somewhere like hawaii, where admittedly, there are very few blacks, but also where whites aren't even the largest minority, much less a majority, and you see much less racial segregation in housing. Its still segregated by wealth though.

            • (Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Wednesday March 11 2015, @11:26PM

              by LoRdTAW (3755) on Wednesday March 11 2015, @11:26PM (#156383) Journal

              Since predominately black neighborhoods are also predominately poor neighborhoods, you aren't going to see many people voluntarily moving to them, regardless of race.

              You havn't met hipsters then. Williamsburg was a predominantly Hispanic neighborhood. Now its high priced hipster heaven and mostly white. They even pushed into parts of Bushwick and now Prospect Lefferts Gardens and even encroaching into crown hights, all black areas. My brother lives in Prospect Lefferts Gardens and his GF is a hipster poster child.

              • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @11:30PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @11:30PM (#156387)

                So if whites don't want to live in non-white neighborhoods, they're racists?

                And when whites do move into non-white neighborhoods, they're racists?

                Is there anywhere where whites aren't racists?

                • (Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Thursday March 12 2015, @03:16PM

                  by LoRdTAW (3755) on Thursday March 12 2015, @03:16PM (#156710) Journal

                  Is there anywhere where whites aren't racists?

                  Yup: All white neighborhoods.

                  So to solve racism we simply have to make all neighborhoods white. Easy peasy.

              • (Score: 2) by pnkwarhall on Thursday March 12 2015, @02:09AM

                by pnkwarhall (4558) on Thursday March 12 2015, @02:09AM (#156460)

                Gentrification [wikipedia.org]
                Believe it or not, this is intentional! Hipsters don't just move into "poor neighborhoods". Hipsters chase bohemians (who need/choose to live cheaply), and then Capitalists chase hipsters (who have money to spend)...

                --
                Lift Yr Skinny Fists Like Antennas to Heaven
                • (Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Thursday March 12 2015, @03:34PM

                  by LoRdTAW (3755) on Thursday March 12 2015, @03:34PM (#156731) Journal

                  You said it better.
                  I used to frequent the budding Williamsburg area before the real hipsters came flooding in. A mutual friend found a bar tucked away that was ran by two girls who were artists. The bar usually saw the artsy crowd and was frequently hosting all sorts of interesting music nights on saturdays. I became friendly with them and we were regulars, one of the girls even made sure we had reserved seats at the head of the bar. Most of the original brick industrial buildings were still standing and housed businesses. It was kind of dingy and most of the bohemian types were artists who rented the industrial buildings to make studios and live in them. Some were even communes where upward of a dozen artists, transients, backpackers or gutter punk types would live for various periods of time. Then slowly the hipsters started pouring in. The commercial building owners saw the opportunity to cash out big time and sold their properties. Now the place is clogged with gross modern (meaning cheap as hell to build) architecture erasing the old dingy character the old Brooklyn neighborhood had. It was sanitized and overpriced. Now the yuppies have taken over and high prices high rises are built on the east river on the old primarily industrial Kent Ave.

                  • (Score: 2) by pnkwarhall on Thursday March 12 2015, @04:31PM

                    by pnkwarhall (4558) on Thursday March 12 2015, @04:31PM (#156772)

                    "Disgusting" indeed. But the property values went up!! (So it must be an improvement.)

                    --
                    Lift Yr Skinny Fists Like Antennas to Heaven
          • (Score: 3, Informative) by Jeremiah Cornelius on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:51PM

            by Jeremiah Cornelius (2785) on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:51PM (#156236) Journal

            I'm mixed - pass as "all-white".
            I've lived in all kinds of neighborhoods - next to golf courses, next to housing projects. I've had better neighbors near the project. ;-)

            But US is HUGE. I don't know anybody who wants to live in South Side Chicago, or the segregated neighborhoods in Cleveland or Detroit - black or white.

            Lot different in San Diego...

            --
            You're betting on the pantomime horse...
        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Ethanol-fueled on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:15PM

          by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:15PM (#156195) Homepage

          "Little bit racist" means that stereotypes are often true, and when faced with inordinate amounts of them on a per-person per-race (or ethnicity, whatever) basis in x amount of time, I will not only acknowledge those stereotypes but hold them up for ridicule.

          Yeah, unlike all of you perfect holier-than-thou logical enlightened beings, I am imperfect. And I love it.

          Suck my cock.

          • (Score: 3, Touché) by mtrycz on Wednesday March 11 2015, @07:00PM

            by mtrycz (60) on Wednesday March 11 2015, @07:00PM (#156245)

            Neither am I perfect. But I won't choose to dwell in imperfection, there's no life in that.

            --
            In capitalist America, ads view YOU!
            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @11:28PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @11:28PM (#156385)

              I don't think he chooses to dwell in it but rather acknowledge the fact and move on.

      • (Score: 0, Troll) by jmorris on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:15PM

        by jmorris (4844) on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:15PM (#156196)

        I think he is just accepting the new SJW redefinition and that for all intents and purposes they now have the power to define the word. Everybody who disagrees with them on any detail is a racist, therefore anyone who isn't a SJW is a racist. They use this power to end debate, nobody wants to be thought of as a racist so when they hurl that at someone they tend to shut up. So I'm a racist, you probably are too. And only when we accept that everyone is a racist can we all laugh at them and start to ignore them. Then we can reclaim the language and restore the word to a useful meaning again.

        • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Pr. L Muishkin on Wednesday March 11 2015, @07:18PM

          by Pr. L Muishkin (5143) on Wednesday March 11 2015, @07:18PM (#156258)

          It's at times like these that I like to produce the full sized, hard bound copy of the OED from my backpack, (it's always adventure time,) and challenge those attempting to redefine a word to see how their definition stacks up against the opinion of people actually paid to define words. If all else fails, I have a very large, heavy, harbound lump of dead tree at my disposal.

          • (Score: 2) by CRCulver on Wednesday March 11 2015, @07:49PM

            by CRCulver (4390) on Wednesday March 11 2015, @07:49PM (#156271) Homepage

            ...challenge those attempting to redefine a word to see how their definition stacks up against the opinion of people actually paid to define words.

            Are you unaware that the OED, like all modern dictionaries, does not claim to represent what "words really mean" but only reflects the meanings attributed to these words by English-speaking society? The editors of the OED would be the first to admit that words are continually redefined as they are used in discourse, which is a natural and inevitable part of how human language works, and successive editions of the OED have made updates to show those changing usages. The OED entries for "race" and "racism"/"racist" are a good case in point. The term "racism" is used today for somewhat different and expanded things than in earlier decades, and the OED documents that.

            • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @10:02PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @10:02PM (#156334)

              Are you unaware that the OED, like all modern dictionaries, does not claim to represent what "words really mean" but only reflects the meanings attributed to these words by English-speaking society?

              Indeed. It is closer to the mark to say that dictionaries show usage; they do not proscribe the actual meanings of words.

          • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday March 11 2015, @09:43PM

            by FatPhil (863) <reversethis-{if.fdsa} {ta} {tnelyos-cp}> on Wednesday March 11 2015, @09:43PM (#156328) Homepage
            Damn, out of mod-points, you'll have to get a disagreeing reply instead.

            Please look up "prescriptive", "proscriptive" and "descriptive" in your OED. And then accept that the OED is almost entirely descriptive, with just a tiny waft of proscriptivity (when making comments, but not judgements, about the archaic, obsolete, vulgar, informal, etc. nature of certain meanings, spellings, or words).

            I'm sure you'll find M-W is the same - what does it say about "supercede" (wrong spelling?), "although" (not a real word?), "clepe" (archaic?) etc?
            --
            I know I'm God, because every time I pray to him, I find I'm talking to myself.
            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @01:59AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 12 2015, @01:59AM (#156457)

              Except that what these people seem to do is outright deny that certain definitions even exist, and just repeat their new definitions over and over again.

          • (Score: 3, Funny) by pnkwarhall on Thursday March 12 2015, @02:15AM

            by pnkwarhall (4558) on Thursday March 12 2015, @02:15AM (#156462)

            >>If all else fails, I have a very large, heavy, harbound lump of dead tree at my disposal.
            I wanted to welcome you to Soylent as a new user when I noticed your comment in a different article, but now I get the idea that when you lose/can't win an argument you resort to violence...

            --
            Lift Yr Skinny Fists Like Antennas to Heaven
        • (Score: 5, Insightful) by K_benzoate on Wednesday March 11 2015, @07:33PM

          by K_benzoate (5036) on Wednesday March 11 2015, @07:33PM (#156266)

          I refuse to accept their attempt to redefine the word, and I throw it back at them. If they come at me with that "racism = power + prejudice" I'll just accuse them of being racist in turn. Claiming that only certain racial groups can be racist is, by definition, racist thinking. The opposite of this thinking is individualism, allowing people to escape the group identity they were born into and choose their own beliefs and ideas. It would in fact be racist to say that black people are incapable of racism. It's also infantilizing and strips them of agency. You have to allow a group the ability to do wrong in order for right action to have meaning when freely chosen.

          SJWs treat minorities (and women, who aren't a minority but are usually thrown in) as pets. They can do no wrong. It's always the master's fault for mistreating them or socializing them incorrectly. That's supremely bigoted, arrogant, and reprehensible.

          --
          Climate change is real and primarily caused by human activity.
      • (Score: 1) by Arik on Wednesday March 11 2015, @09:15PM

        by Arik (4543) on Wednesday March 11 2015, @09:15PM (#156308) Journal
        Racism is a word thrown around a lot, but few really think about what it means.

        Racism is the belief that there are multiple modern human races.

        It's a mistaken belief (all modern humans are the same race, the last time 'interracial' was actually a thing was tens of thousands of years ago before the neanderthals all died out) but it's not, in and of itself, has to do any damage. Lots of people believe lots of silly things and as long as they mind their own business and dont cause harm to others we do not and should not care.

        Obviously, there are dangerous violent racists - they do exist - but the vast majority of racists are harmless.
        --
        If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
        • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday March 11 2015, @10:42PM

          by FatPhil (863) <reversethis-{if.fdsa} {ta} {tnelyos-cp}> on Wednesday March 11 2015, @10:42PM (#156349) Homepage
          > Racism is a word thrown around a lot, but few really think about what it means.
          > Racism is the belief that there are multiple modern human races.

          Nope. None of the useful modern definitions of racism make the presumption that the old-fashioned physical anthropological concept of human races is in any way useful or meaningful. There are some useless modern definitions (used by govenment, in the context of censuses), which cling to some older concepts, but their existance does not support your assertion - governments have never been any good at defining anything, let alone something as complex and touchy as race and racism.
          --
          I know I'm God, because every time I pray to him, I find I'm talking to myself.
        • (Score: 2) by JNCF on Thursday March 12 2015, @02:42AM

          by JNCF (4317) on Thursday March 12 2015, @02:42AM (#156472) Journal

          Race has a biological definition [wikipedia.org] and a cultural definition, [wikipedia.org] the latter of which is reserved for humans. By the biological definiton I believe most anthropologists would actually call Neanderthals a subspecies, not a race, but that's a pretty mushy line.

          Cultural race correlates to genetic markers, but only in the context of a specific place and time. In the USA, a child born to one "black" parent and one "white" parent is called black, even though it is genetically equally similar to both parents. If said child moves to South Africa its will suddenly be called "mixed" instead. Different cultures have different definitions of different races. "Hutus" and "Tutsis" are both black in America.

          • (Score: 1) by Arik on Thursday March 12 2015, @02:08PM

            by Arik (4543) on Thursday March 12 2015, @02:08PM (#156668) Journal
            "In the USA, a child born to one "black" parent and one "white" parent is called black, even though it is genetically equally similar to both parents. If said child moves to South Africa its will suddenly be called "mixed" instead. Different cultures have different definitions of different races."

            Actually, in the US today, he will be called 'mixed' as well, until and unless he is perceived to have 'made it' at which point he becomes black. See e.g. Barack Obama 'the mixed candidate' became 'the black president.'

            What you are saying was true in the US a few decades ago though. This cultural perception of race can be extremely fluid.

            But I think my point stands. This cultural perception of race is quite simply incorrect, and the flexibility and cultural relativity of the categories should demonstrate that pretty clearly. The word 'race' attributes an objective biological reality to these cultural categories that does not exist in any case.

            --
            If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
            • (Score: 2) by JNCF on Saturday March 14 2015, @05:18PM

              by JNCF (4317) on Saturday March 14 2015, @05:18PM (#157808) Journal

              Eh, we're getting into definitions of words now. People certainly use the word "race" in the way I described (or something close to it). They also use it in the sense that you mean. It's confusing, but hey, that's human language for you. You can not like a definition that a word has, but it doesn't stop it form having that definition.

      • (Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Wednesday March 11 2015, @11:30PM

        by LoRdTAW (3755) on Wednesday March 11 2015, @11:30PM (#156386) Journal

        It's used for shock value.

  • (Score: 2) by CirclesInSand on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:34PM

    by CirclesInSand (2899) on Wednesday March 11 2015, @06:34PM (#156215)

    So far I've only found a video with 2 phrases in it. Is there a full version of the song? I'm kinda curious what the full lyrics are.

  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @08:45PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 11 2015, @08:45PM (#156292)

    Just say NO

  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Hartree on Wednesday March 11 2015, @09:18PM

    by Hartree (195) on Wednesday March 11 2015, @09:18PM (#156316)

    The people in that video certainly can't be guilty of "thought" crime.

    It's pretty safe to say there was damn little intelligent thought happening there.