[Y3a]

Why is the Ms. Black America Pagent not racist, but a Ms. White America is?

Seems like 2 standards.

Racist or Bigot?? Why are those two words given the same meaning these days?

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by Y3a

Why is the Ms. Black America Pagent not racist, but a Ms. White America is?

Seems like 2 standards.

Racist or Bigot?? Why are those two words given the same meaning these days?

Would you mind expanding further on the idea before this turns out in a flame fest?

[Rolling Bones]

Well, since blacks weren't let into a lot of tingys and treated like detritus and stuff over the years they started their own stuffs.

No brainer...even you should have figured that one out buddy boy. Or maybe you were left (left..hehe ) behind.

[acadian]

"Because white people are the spawn of Satan and deserve every bad thing karma can throw at them..."

[chabig]

I'll never forget the Grammy awards in the late '80s where the Best Black Male Pop Singer was Lionel Richie, and the Best Male Pop Singer was...Lionel Richie!

Chris

[tie]

I think it is racist. (Do these pageants actually exist, or did you just make it up?)

[Gee-Man]

Originally Posted by Y3a

Why is the Ms. Black America Pagent not racist, but a Ms. White America is?

Obviously you know nothing of the history of these pageants. If you think blacks started the Miss Black America pageant because they are "racist", you are mistaken.

The Miss America pageant actively excluded women of color from competing until the 1970s. Yes, you heard right - the 1970s. For many years, we already had a "Miss White America" - it was called the Miss America pageant. Blacks were forced to compete in a separate but unequal Ms. Black America pageant, because the organizers of the pageant believed that women of color simply don't compare to white women in beauty and therefore should not share a stage with them.

It wasn't until 1980 when a black woman won the title of Miss America.

Seems like 2 standards.

Yes, there are. But blacks did not create this double-standard, they are victims of it. If we could go back in time and erase the history of racism, then perhaps you'd have an excellent point. Sadly, we cannot.

Racist or Bigot?? Why are those two words given the same meaning these days?

You tell me. I for one know the difference. Maybe you'd like to introduce us all to your invited guest straw-man who does not know the difference.

[Cubeoid]

Originally Posted by acadian

"Because white people are the spawn of Satan and deserve every bad thing karma can throw at them..."

[Railroader]

It's not racism. It's simply segregation. They don't want to compete.

[Ozmodiar]

Sort of like how Black History Month is in February and White History Month is March through January.

The majority doesn't need a way to distinguish itself from everyone else. This isn't a new concept.

[Face Ache]

Originally Posted by Gee-Man

Obviously you know nothing of the history of these pageants. If you think blacks started the Miss Black America pageant because they are "racist", you are mistaken.

The Miss America pageant actively excluded women of color from competing until the 1970s. Yes, you heard right - the 1970s. For many years, we already had a "Miss White America" - it was called the Miss America pageant. Blacks were forced to compete in a separate but unequal Ms. Black America pageant, because the organizers of the pageant believed that women of color simply don't compare to white women in beauty and therefore should not share a stage with them.

It wasn't until 1980 when a black woman won the title of Miss America.


Yes, there are. But blacks did not create this double-standard, they are victims of it. If we could go back in time and erase the history of racism, then perhaps you'd have an excellent point. Sadly, we cannot.


You tell me. I for one know the difference. Maybe you'd like to introduce us all to your invited guest straw-man who does not know the difference.

COMING THROUGH!

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by Face Ache

COMING THROUGH!

Man, I HATE Illinois Nazis.

[Millennium]

Because people haven't figured out that the only way we're ever going to resolve race relations is both the simplest and hardest thing in the world: to just let go.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by Millennium

Because people haven't figured out that the only way we're ever going to resolve race relations is both the simplest and hardest thing in the world: to just let go.

AMEN!

[Y3a]

I'm not talking specifically about the pagents, just the PERCEPTIONS folks have in regards to what IS or ISN'T racist.

I'm tired of all the labels added to people, like liberal, Afro-American, Icon, etc.
I see many more TV programs expounding on being "Black" than I do on being "White".
I see a stigma against white people, as something to be ashamed about.

Race as an issue should be dead, but as long as it's convienient to use the race card I guess it's not.

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by Y3a

I'm not talking specifically about the pagents, just the PERCEPTIONS folks have in regards to what IS or ISN'T racist.

I'm tired of all the labels added to people, like liberal, Afro-American, Icon, etc.
I see many more TV programs expounding on being "Black" than I do on being "White".
I see a stigma against white people, as something to be ashamed about.

Race as an issue should be dead, but as long as it's convienient to use the race card I guess it's not.

Besides for police work (DNA and stuff), the race card is useless.

However, the culture differentiation card shall live long and prosper, hopefully.

[Gee-Man]

Originally Posted by Face Ache

COMING THROUGH!

Nice pic. Gotta steal it someday next time I need to make the same point

I think I get what you're sayin', but you may have missed my point - I'm not jumping off that bridge with the others. Explaining why it's this way isn't the same as justifying why it should be this way. I did the former, I'm in no way doing the latter. If I had my way we would have one pageant for all types of people, not 2 or more. Actually, if I had my way, we'd have no pageants, I think they're a relic of another era that we should have moved past long ago. But that's a different discussion...

[Gee-Man]

Originally Posted by Y3a

I'm not talking specifically about the pagents, just the PERCEPTIONS folks have in regards to what IS or ISN'T racist.

I'm tired of all the labels added to people, like liberal, Afro-American, Icon, etc.
I see many more TV programs expounding on being "Black" than I do on being "White".
I see a stigma against white people, as something to be ashamed about.

Race as an issue should be dead, but as long as it's convienient to use the race card I guess it's not.

I sympathize - labelling sucks. But racism is about far more than labels. The "race card" isn't what's sustaining racism, it's our collective inability to confront and solve the last remaining racial problems.

There seems to be an idea among many that racism is simply a behavior, with only immediate consequences. The theory goes that if you stop the behavior, then all consequences of that behavior also cease, and therefore the problem is solved. Hence the wish that "if people stopped being racist, racism would cease to be a problem."

If only that were true. Racism has long-lasting consequences that go well beyond the behavior of individual people. If everyone stopped and simply let go of race tomorrow, you'd still have a pile of people in a near-permanent underclass, you'd still have segregated schools, you'd still have all kinds of race-originated problems to deal with even though racism itself as an individual behavior would be no more.

That is the problem facing us today. It's a great thing that racism isn't what it used to be, but the consequences of those old behaviors aren't far enough behind us just yet. We simply can't pretend that everything would be fine if people just stopped talking about racism, solving it requires everybody to be pro-active to acknowledge and eliminate the pre-existing problems. Not just blacks and other minorities, not just whites, but everyone. The only chance we have is to eliminate the problems that came from the past as well as the current problems.

[Spliffdaddy]

Yeah, having a 'miss black america' pageant is as racist as racist could possibly be.

But you can kid yourselves and pretend it's somehow justified.

[UNTeMac]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

Yeah, having a 'miss black america' pageant is as racist as racist could possibly be.

But you can kid yourselves and pretend it's somehow justified.

Fine, but care to elaborate? I think this post made a point you're avoiding:

Obviously you know nothing of the history of these pageants. If you think blacks started the Miss Black America pageant because they are "racist", you are mistaken.

The Miss America pageant actively excluded women of color from competing until the 1970s. Yes, you heard right - the 1970s. For many years, we already had a "Miss White America" - it was called the Miss America pageant. Blacks were forced to compete in a separate but unequal Ms. Black America pageant, because the organizers of the pageant believed that women of color simply don't compare to white women in beauty and therefore should not share a stage with them.

It wasn't until 1980 when a black woman won the title of Miss America.

Quote:
Seems like 2 standards.

Yes, there are. But blacks did not create this double-standard, they are victims of it. If we could go back in time and erase the history of racism, then perhaps you'd have an excellent point. Sadly, we cannot.

Quote:
Racist or Bigot?? Why are those two words given the same meaning these days?

You tell me. I for one know the difference. Maybe you'd like to introduce us all to your invited guest straw-man who does not know the difference.

[Spliffdaddy]

So the 'Miss Black America' pageant was started in the 1970's because blacks weren't allowed to enter the "Miss America Pageant"?

Or was it started *after* blacks were allowed to enter the "Miss America Pageant"?

Was it done because of an injustice? or in spite of one?

Why are all white people blamed for this injustice?

Why isn't the "Miss America Pageant" blamed for this injustice?


ya know, I haven't lived all that long....but I'm well past being tired of getting blamed because I'm white.

In all seriousness, I don't care about anyone's problems unless I'm directly to blame for those problems. So show me proof that I caused harm - and we'll talk. Else move along. And play the role of victim for another audience.

[Hawkeye_a]

Hate, preaching of hate and discrimination(of any kind) superseed 'freedom to say whatever the hell you want', at least in my head. Of course, they can say/sing whatever the hell they want, but dont count on me to defend their freedom of speach, by preaching hate and racism, they, like anyone else who does it, looses that right to me. Of course the law is different....but laws have changed a heck of a lot over the past few centuries and decades. I wouldnt hide behind a consitution to determine my ethical and moral values, but thats just me.

As for "Miss Black America", i call racism as well. just as i call "BET" racit, and those laws that have different application depending on ones ethnicity.

It's kinda weird, this racism thing in the global arena, the "west" and prosporous nations o nthis planet seem to be pre occupied with skin color.....usually Black or white....there's also brown, olive, yellow, red,....well you get the idea. And thankfully most of the inhabitants of this tiny planet are a mix, it would be hell if the planet were divided into black and white.....ugh. Also noteworthy is that that the non-b&w world(meaning people who dont necessarily equate racism with skin color) fight over other issues of race (Religion as an example). Seems like despite all we have in common, we still seem to dwell on the differences no matter how small and insignificant, and for some inexplicable reason, those differences are always seen as "negative".

[ghporter]

In a recent column, Lenard Pitts said that he thought the black community needs new leadership. Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and Louis Farakhan seem to be the most notable leaders today, and not one of them seems to have the idea that equality is a fitting end. Both Sharpton and Farakhan appear to believe that the whole world is against them, and they need to make as much noise as possible-all of it hate-based. Jesse Jackson often has good ideas, but the man can't simply say "Why don't we do this..." Instead he has to go on a tirade about history (that he doesn't always get right), just to put everyone on edge.

How does this apply to this thread? The whole idea that African Americans need different treatment in the mainstream society reinforces differences and keeps people paying attention to those differences. Why not provide help to people who are economically underpriveleged regardless of what they look like? (In the U.S. there are far more poor white people than poor black people, by the way.) Why not help out people who have to go to dumb schools, regardless of what they look like? Um, because certain "leaders" would be out of a job if they couldn't spout "all white men are evil" and "it's all a white conspiracy" stuff? That's what I think.

[Gee-Man]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

So the 'Miss Black America' pageant was started in the 1970's because blacks weren't allowed to enter the "Miss America Pageant"?

Or was it started *after* blacks were allowed to enter the "Miss America Pageant"?

Was it done because of an injustice? or in spite of one?

It was done because of an injustice, not in spite of one. That much is obvious. "Miss Black America" was started in 1968 as a protest to the fact that the Miss America pageant excluded black women throughout its history.

Why are all white people blamed for this injustice?

Blame is irrelevant as long as you're willing to simply recognize facts. Getting defensive about the facts accomplishes nothing.

Why isn't the "Miss America Pageant" blamed for this injustice?

You think they came up with this idea on their own? That the "Miss America Pageant", and ONLY the pageant, were racist and everybody else in general society was completely innocent and color-blind? Jeez, you are naive.

The pageant was reflective of the society at that time, it didn't exist in a vacuum.

ya know, I haven't lived all that long....but I'm well past being tired of getting blamed because I'm white.

In all seriousness, I don't care about anyone's problems unless I'm directly to blame for those problems. So show me proof that I caused harm - and we'll talk. Else move along. And play the role of victim for another audience.

I'll try to make my point a different way. I'm no Aesop, but here's a shot

--------
There are two brothers from the same family, one white, one black. The dad was white, the mom was black. The parents used to have terrible, horrible fights in the house the brothers grew up in. Dad used to beat the hell out of mom, and the fights were so bad that the house was trashed - dried food on the walls from it being thrown at each other, smashed tables, ruined appliances, and general disrepair everywhere. The place is a mess.

Finally, after many years of this, the authorities step in and stop the fighting. The parents are sent to separate homes to live out their lives, and the two brothers inherit the house. The brothers move back into the house, and they get along pretty well, but the house is still in disrepair from what happened between their parents.

The white brother says "I didn't trash the house, don't blame me." He moves into the one bedroom that is least damaged, his old bedroom where the parents mostly stayed out of.

The black brother moves into his old bedroom, which is in the worst shape. The paint is damaged, the furniture is broken, and everything is in horrible shape. The parents must have fought a lot in here. He gets along fine with his brother, but he's left to buy new furniture and paint and everything to repair the mess the parents left.

The black brother is frustrated by the white brother who gets angry every time he brings up what the parents did to the house. "That's in the past", the white brother says. "We should move on."

The black brother says, "We both live here now, and we should both take responsibility for cleaning up the mess they left. I can't do it by myself, the house is too big for that."
-------------

That's where the story ends. It'd be great if it the story finished with both brothers rolling up their sleeves and working on fixing the house together.

[Spliffdaddy]

so the white brother is made to feel responsible for cleaning up a mess he didn't create.

just like I was saying.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by Gee-Man

The black brother moves into his old bedroom, which is in the worst shape. The paint is damaged, the furniture is broken, and everything is in horrible shape. The parents must have fought a lot in here. He gets along fine with his brother, but he's left to buy new furniture and paint and everything to repair the mess the parents left.

Paint.
Paintbrush.
Ikea?
Sleeves rolled up.
A little hard work.
A little taking of responsibility.

Seriously, that's about the worst boil down of race matters that I've ever seen. In that real life situation most anyone would tell their OWN BROTHER to get off his ass and not blame them for him living in a mess they didn't create. Let alone in reality where the parties aren't even blood relatives.

In your example, the parents and the parents alone were responsible for creating the mess. If ever there was an example where the next generation needed to move on, take responsibility for themselves, and not try to guilt-trip and place false blame on someone else, your example would be it. You pretty much summed Spliffdaddy's take on the matter perfectly.

In terms of actual race matters, I agree with Millennium- people will never get passed all this useless ******** until they can simply let it go.

And those who actively go around looking for racism all the time, looking to be offended by everything, looking to blame everyone else for things they had nothing to do with, and looking to use the charge of racism as a political ploy and a crutch, have the farthest distance to cover of anyone.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Ozmodiar

Sort of like how Black History Month is in February and White History Month is March through January.

The months March through January are not dedicated to white people. Black people who actually did something are mentioned in normal history classes just like people of every other race. Just because we don't go through an exhaustive list of every unimportant action ever taken by a black person like they want us to during Black History Month doesn't mean blacks are excluded. The invention of peanut butter and curtain rods would be glossed over even if a white man had done it.

[Eug Wanker]

Speaking of paint.... I like my friend's idea of a pigment bomb. Bomb the world, and make everyone a nice shade of purple.

[Y3a]

What about reparations? I think ANY FORMER SLAVE should get the bucks.

BUT... They are all dead now.

And who should have paid them?
The slave holders....Which are all dead too.

Harry Belefonte will tell you otherwise, and he gets media attention while spouting his BS.

More ficticious Urban Ledgends.

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by Gee-Man

There are two brothers from the same family, one white, one black. The dad was white, the mom was black.

I don't think it works that way.

[Gee-Man]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

Paint.
Paintbrush.
Ikea?
Sleeves rolled up.
A little hard work.
A little taking of responsibility.

Reading comprehension, much? I said exactly the same thing: "It'd be great if it the story finished with both brothers rolling up their sleeves and working on fixing the house together."

Next time, try arguing against the actual post instead of what's in your head.

Seriously, that's about the worst boil down of race matters that I've ever seen. In that real life situation most anyone would tell their OWN BROTHER to get off his ass and not blame them for him living in a mess they didn't create. Let alone in reality where the parties aren't even blood relatives.

In your example, the parents and the parents alone were responsible for creating the mess. If ever there was an example where the next generation needed to move on, take responsibility for themselves, and not try to guilt-trip and place false blame on someone else, your example would be it. You pretty much summed Spliffdaddy's take on the matter perfectly.

*****WHOOSH*****

That was the sound of my point going straight over your head.

In my story, the black brother doesn't blame the white brother for what happened with the parents. Man you missed it by a mile. No, the point is that the white brother believes he is entitled to sit on his ass because "he didn't do it". But because they both live in the house, the only way the house will get repaired is if both of them go in and fix it together.

Spliffdaddy's point is that unless he was directly responsible, even though it affects him, he doesn't have to lift a finger. Completely opposite.

Yes, the parents are responsible for the mess. But since they're gone, who is going to clean it up? Is it the black brother alone, or the white brother alone? Or maybe, just maybe, both of them should take responsibility and not blame each other?

In terms of actual race matters, I agree with Millennium- people will never get passed all this useless ******** until they can simply let it go.

And those who actively go around looking for racism all the time, looking to be offended by everything, looking to blame everyone else for things they had nothing to do with, and looking to use the charge of racism as a political ploy and a crutch, have the farthest distance to cover of anyone.

I agree - and I will add to your statement. In addition, those who simply pretend that all the problems that originated with racism will magically disappear by merely not talking about race contribute to the problem just as much, if not more so.

[Gee-Man]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

so the white brother is made to feel responsible for cleaning up a mess he didn't create.

just like I was saying.

You're half right. The white brother is reponsible for cleaning up a mess he didn't create. The black brother is also responsible for cleaning up a mess he didn't create.

Not at all like you were saying.

[Gee-Man]

Originally Posted by nonhuman

I don't think it works that way.

Two points:

1) It's a S-T-O-R-Y.

2) Actually, on occasion it has happened that way. There are families of mixed race where one child came out with light skin while the other had dark skin. There's at least one example in my own family, in fact.

[christ]

Originally Posted by Gee-Man

It was done because of an injustice, not in spite of one. That much is obvious. "Miss Black America" was started in 1968 as a protest to the fact that the Miss America pageant excluded black women throughout its history....

... so why wasn't Miss Black America abandoned when people of colour were allowed into Miss America? It would appear that the point had been made, and the battle won.

It appears that the boot is now on the other foot, unless whites are to be allowed into the Miss Black America pageant - if it was racism (and/or an injustice) to exclude a race before, why isn't it racism (and/or an injustice) to exclude a race today?

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by Gee-Man

Two points:

1) It's a S-T-O-R-Y.

2) Actually, on occasion it has happened that way. There are families of mixed race where one child came out with light skin while the other had dark skin. There's at least one example in my own family, in fact.

1. I know. I was joking.

2. True, but to then say that one is white while the other is black wouldn't really be accurate. They're both the same thing, they just have slightly different physical characteristics like any other siblings.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by christ

... so why wasn't Miss Black America abandoned when people of colour were allowed into Miss America? It would appear that the point had been made, and the battle won.

It appears that the boot is now on the other foot, unless whites are to be allowed into the Miss Black America pageant - if it was racism (and/or an injustice) to exclude a race before, why isn't it racism (and/or an injustice) to exclude a race today?

One point for the Savior!

[Gee-Man]

Originally Posted by christ

... so why wasn't Miss Black America abandoned when people of colour were allowed into Miss America? It would appear that the point had been made, and the battle won.

It appears that the boot is now on the other foot, unless whites are to be allowed into the Miss Black America pageant - if it was racism (and/or an injustice) to exclude a race before, why isn't it racism (and/or an injustice) to exclude a race today?

You must have missed what I wrote before:

Originally Posted by Gee-Man

I think I get what you're sayin', but you may have missed my point - I'm not jumping off that bridge with the others. Explaining why it's this way isn't the same as justifying why it should be this way. I did the former, I'm in no way doing the latter. If I had my way we would have one pageant for all types of people, not 2 or more. Actually, if I had my way, we'd have no pageants, I think they're a relic of another era that we should have moved past long ago. But that's a different discussion...

"Miss Black America" has less of a purpose today than it did in 1968.

My issue is with those who try to attribute the motivations of the beginnings of the "Miss Black America" pageant to racism. That is factually wrong - the pageant may have outlived its usefulness because of changes in society, but it's not "racist" because it wasn't started with the express intent to exclude anyone based on perceived superiority of one race. It was started with the intent to try to include those who were shunned.

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by Gee-Man

My issue is with those who try to attribute the motivations of the beginnings of the "Miss Black America" pageant to racism. That is factually wrong - the pageant may have outlived its usefulness because of changes in society, but it's not "racist" because it wasn't started with the express intent to exclude anyone based on perceived superiority of one race. It was started with the intent to try to include those who were shunned.

But it was motivated by racism... It was racism that made it's creation necessary (in as much as a beauty pageant can be necessary). And if they really wanted to be inclusive they wouldn't have made it for blacks only, they would have opened it to any white contestants that wanted to participate as well.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by Gee-Man

Reading comprehension, much? I said exactly the same thing: "It'd be great if it the story finished with both brothers rolling up their sleeves and working on fixing the house together."

Next time, try arguing against the actual post instead of what's in your head.

It’s a bad analogy that you’d have done well to drop. Not a single thing about it mirrors reality very well, and it makes silly assumptions that don’t mirror any actual aspects of race relations.

*****WHOOSH*****

That was the sound of me not having a point that makes any sense in the real world. [fixed]

In my story, the black brother doesn't blame the white brother for what happened with the parents. Man you missed it by a mile. No, the point is that the white brother believes he is entitled to sit on his ass because "he didn't do it". But because they both live in the house, the only way the house will get repaired is if both of them go in and fix it together.

This is pure nonsense. First of all, if the house represents society, I don’t see any real life example whereby the white brother is always just sitting around on his ass waiting for the black brother to clean everything up.

Most people, of all races, that aren’t mired in the uselessness of past racism have already ‘cleaned up’ where they live, take care of their own lives and now just wish not to be blamed for other people’s messes. Moreover, they'd like it if others got off their asses and did the same.

Your goofy analogy paints exactly the opposite situation; it’s the black brother sitting in HIS OWN ROOM whining that ‘we both live here’. NO THEY DON’T! The white brother is responsible for cleaning his OWN room, and taking care of his part of the house. The black brother is responsible for THE SAME! His own room is his OWN responsibility entirely!

NONE of this is unique to anyone based on their race, what their parents did, or any other outside factor.

Spliffdaddy's point is that unless he was directly responsible, even though it affects him, he doesn't have to lift a finger. Completely opposite.

No, in line with your silly story, he's not responsible for cleaning up someone else's messy room. Unless you can prove he's just sitting around not taking care of his own responsibilities in life, you have absolutely ZERO point to jibes with his reality.

Or maybe, just maybe, both of them should take responsibility and not blame each other?

Keep this part, lose the rest of the silly story and you'll be on to something!

I agree - and I will add to your statement. In addition, those who simply pretend that all the problems that originated with racism will magically disappear by merely not talking about race contribute to the problem just as much, if not more so.

So long as they aren't sitting around in messes that they don't bother to clean up, it really wouldn't affect much of anything.

However, those who ARE sitting around in messy rooms waiting for others to come clean it up for them, and making silly blame-game excuses for why they sit mired in the mess have a LOT more at stake in getting to that responsibility thing than others do.

[OAW]

Gee-Man is on the money regarding the whys and the wherefores of the Miss Black America contest. The Miss America pageant was started in 1921 and African-Americans weren't allowed to participate until 1970 ... almost 50 years later. And no African-American ever won the competition until 24 years after that in 1984. So one can credibly argue that the "participation" during this time frame was little more than tokenism on the part of the pageant organizers. Thus in the late 1960s the Miss Black America contest was started in direct response to this reality.

Having said that, since Vanessa Williams became the first African-American winner in 1984 there have been 6 other African-Americans to hold the title of Miss America.

Vanessa Williams - 1984

Suzette Charles - 1984

Debbye Turner - 1990

Marjorie Vincent - 1991

Kimberly Aiken - 1994

Erika Harold - 2003

Erica Dunlap - 2004

The good thing about all of this is that there have been enough African-American winners to credibly argue that black participation is no longer tokenism. In fact, the winner's racial background is no longer even "noteworthy" when an African-American wins because it has happened so often .... and this IMO is a positive development. OTOH, the pageant still caters to the typical Europeanized standard of beauty. When Vanessa Williams won in 1984, most black people I know (myself included) didn't even realize she was African-American until the next day when the headlines announced it. She is bi-racial and very fair-skinned so it is not surprising that the first African-American winner would have the "black woman that can pass for a white woman" look. Since then there have African-Americans of darker skin tone ... but nearly all of them (with perhaps the exception of Marjorie Vincent) have had "European" features with respect to lip and nose thickness and hairstyle. As of yet there have been no very dark skinned winners or a winner with decidedly "African" features (West African to be more exact). And you definitely haven't seen an African-American participant wearing their hair in a natural style ... braids, twists, dreads, afro, etc. ... so one could argue that there is still a place for a Miss Black America contest in the sense that it can embrace the natural beauty of black women. From skin tone, to hair style, even to body shape. After all, plenty of black pageant contestants (and models) tell stories of the hoops and hurdles they go through to rid themselves of their natural curves (hips, thighs, and especially ass) in order to not be considered "fat" by the predominantly white judges.

So while I am somewhat ambivalent on the issue, I think there is still a place for "ethnic" pageants. In the end, the reality is different for the majority than it is for the minority. There simply is no need for a Miss White America pageant ... other than for the sake of these silly debates ... because the fact that whites are the majority in this country makes their interests and standards "mainstream" by default. And it goes both ways ... I would have no problem with a Miss Afrikaner contest for white women in South Africa because they are the minority in that situation. Anyhoo, here's a recent article I saw the other day about this whole idea of "ethnic pageants" that you might find interesting ...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...801739_pf.html

Some notable quotes ...

Robertha Budy heard the insult when she was a little girl, and now, even at Georgia State University in Atlanta, she still hears it. "You're Liberian? Isn't that in Africa? You don't look like it. You're pretty."

The shows are "a validation of beauty and culture that's not seen in the American mainstream," said Shilpa Dav, an assistant professor of American studies at Brandeis University.

"It gives a lot of confidence to women because they are seeing other women who look like them, and their looks are validated"

At immigrant pageants, beauty has a browner, more worldly tinge. Noses are wider and eyes are a gooey chocolate brown, framed in various almond-like contours. Hips sway more in talent segments, such as an adaptation of a Bollywood performance at Miss India or a belly dance at Miss Liberia.

OAW

[Gee-Man]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

Your goofy analogy paints exactly the opposite situation; it’s the black brother sitting in HIS OWN ROOM whining that ‘we both live here’. NO THEY DON’T! The white brother is responsible for cleaning his OWN room, and taking care of his part of the house. The black brother is responsible for THE SAME! His own room is his OWN responsibility entirely!

Once again, you entirely missed the point, either intentionally or not. Maybe I didn't make it clear enough, or you're being deliberately obtuse to find a way to twist my analogy into your own point of view.

The black brother is not waiting on or expecting the white brother to clean his own room. He's already doing that on his own. I made that part of the story explicit (buying paint, new furniture, etc.) The problem is that the REST of the house is also trashed, the only area that isn't is the white brother's room.

However, the white brother considers even the shared areas of the house (kitchen, living room, etc.) "not my job" because he didn't cause the mess. So while both individual rooms are being cleaned up (one slower than the other since there's more to do), the shared rooms are still a mess because the brothers have been unable to work out their differences, take shared responsibility and work together to clean it up.

That's why the black brother is saying "we both live here" - that doesn't refer to his room, it refers to the WHOLE HOUSE.

Keep this part, lose the rest of the silly story and you'll be on to something!

Funny - you finally quoted me accurately, but still got the moral of the story wrong.

Every time I say "everyone is responsible" you usually re-interpret it as "only the white person is responsible". Are you running some kind of automatic word-substitution program on my posts or something?

This is pure nonsense. First of all, if the house represents society, I don’t see any real life example whereby the white brother is always just sitting around on his ass waiting for the black brother to clean everything up.

You've illustrated my point right there. By your logic, everyone who points out a real race problem is "whining". Any problem that has roots in racism was "not created by me, not my responsibility". Every issue where the notion of shared responsibility is suggested is "assigning blame". You have essentially set the bar so high for examples that nothing can possibly cross it, and having done so you can safely sit on your ass (figuratively) and do nothing to help solve the problems. You are doing the exact same thing as the black leaders you often decry - waiting for somebody else to solve it instead of pitching in.

But there are plenty of examples. From infant mortality rates, to crime, to public education disparities, and on and on, there are piles of examples and real-world statistics that reflect the lingering consequences of past racism. These things affect all Americans and should be of concern no matter what your skin color. However, I'm sure not a single one of them would convince you that collective action is required - you'd probably just say "It has nothing to do with me, get off your ass and fix your own problems" no matter what evidence I provide that a problem is bigger than any individual or minority group to fix.

You are part of the reason this problem is so intractable. Apparently, sociology doesn't exist in your world - the only time anyone can claim "racism" is if one individual person does something racist to another individual person.

Let me be clear - I don't think people should sit around and blame others entirely for their troubles. I also don't think people should adapt a "not my problem" attitude when there are problems to be solved that clearly affect all of us.

[Millennium]

Great atrocities were committed in the US, many years ago. Those who were guilty managed to escape justice for their acts. That will forever be a stain on the history of the US.

But it is too late for any real justice, at least as far as any secular standards go. The perpetrators are long dead, well beyond the reach of the judicial system to punish. So are their direct victims, for that matter, beyond our reach to compensate. Will we create further injustice, by forcing innocent people to pay for the crimes of their fathers? Or will we let go, refusing to meet the evils of the past with more evils from the present? No good can ever come from the cycle we're trapped in now; injustice leads to righteous indignitation, which is twisted into hatred, which leads to more injustice.

Letting go is simple. That does not mean it is easy; quite the opposite, actually. The simplest things in the world are often the hardest, and so it is with this. But there is no way around it if you ever want to reach the healing on the other side; the only way to go is through.

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by Gee-Man

The black brother is not waiting on or expecting the white brother to clean his own room. He's already doing that on his own. I made that part of the story explicit (buying paint, new furniture, etc.) The problem is that the REST of the house is also trashed, the only area that isn't is the white brother's room.

But is the rest of the "house" trashed, if we extend the metaphor? Perhaps you should make this clearer, because I know I don't see it, and I doubt I'm the only one who doesn't. What does the white brother's room represent? What does the black brother's room represent? What are the shared areas?

You are part of the reason this problem is so intractable. Apparently, sociology doesn't exist in your world - the only time anyone can claim "racism" is if one individual person does something racist to another individual person.

Yes, exactly. I say the same, but not because of sociology. It would be foolish to say that racists do not exist in the US; of course there are a few. Believe me, I've had the misfortune of living near a couple training their children in that kind of vileness; it makes me sick to my stomach to remember it.

But it is equally foolish to claim that racism is still ingrained into our institutions. This is what anti-discrimination laws are for; to ensure that racism cannot regain the political power it once had. In a society where racists are frequently ridiculed and never taken seriously, can you honestly say that it has any truly insurmountable power? The day racism became a laughingstock was the day it was utterly defeated. The last vestiges are hunted down and eradicated, not through law but through society's own correction mechanisms, whenever they are found.

But we cannot allow racism to be replaced by more racism; no one would argue that this is at all productive. But the opposite of hate is apathy, not love, and the opposite of bias is blindness, not opposing bias. If you decide that this isn't what you want, then this is your prerogative, but if that is the case then know what you are advocating.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by Gee-Man

Once again, you entirely missed the point, either intentionally or not. Maybe I didn't make it clear enough, or you're being deliberately obtuse to find a way to twist my analogy into your own point of view.

The black brother is not waiting on or expecting the white brother to clean his own room. He's already doing that on his own. I made that part of the story explicit (buying paint, new furniture, etc.) The problem is that the REST of the house is also trashed, the only area that isn't is the white brother's room.

You're just trying desperately to make this silly analogy work. Everyone is not sitting around in broken houses, refusing to fix them. That's just nonsense. As I said before, and you of course chose to ignore:

Most people, of all races, that aren’t mired in the uselessness of past racism have already ‘cleaned up’ where they live, take care of their own lives and now just wish not to be blamed for other people’s messes. Moreover, they'd like it if others got off their asses and did the same.

However, the white brother considers even the shared areas of the house (kitchen, living room, etc.) "not my job" because he didn't cause the mess.
So while both individual rooms are being cleaned up (one slower than the other since there's more to do), the shared rooms are still a mess because the brothers have been unable to work out their differences, take shared responsibility and work together to clean it up.

The analogies to rooms have absolutely no real world parallels. Would you care to define them? Most people, regardless of race, aren't sitting around in a world full of broken showers and kitchens their parents trashed that they refuse to fix. Most people HAVE moved on and ‘fixed’ their attitudes about race, you just refuse to recognize this so you can keep pretending the ‘house’ is a wreck, and keep using the issue as a crutch and level false accusations against everyone who doesn't fall for your silly analogies.

That's why the black brother is saying "we both live here" - that doesn't refer to his room, it refers to the WHOLE HOUSE.

And again, you've ignored the fact that when others HAVE fixed the things that it's their responsibility to fix (as most people spend their lives doing) you have ZERO argument. You've yet to prove that Spliffdaddy or anyone else hasn't taken care of what he's responsible for. You’ve only done what your ilk ALWAYS does, level false accusations without actually proving a damned thing.

So you are just willy-nilly redefining everyone’s responsibilities in life, (which basically seems to be that we must agree with you and your ilk) and then lie that everyone is "sitting on their ass" not taking care of whatever it is you want to define that’s not being taken care of. It's pure psycho-babble.

Funny - you finally quoted me accurately, but still got the moral of the story wrong.

Your story has no moral, and you've even proven this by using it (goofy as it is) to level false accusations against people.

You've illustrated my point right there. By your logic, everyone who points out a real race problem is "whining".

You haven't pointed out any 'real race problem'. Your problem is that you want to guilt trip people over things they have nothing to do with, and to label it 'racism' whenever those people disagree with you. That's NOT a race problem, other than the fact that people like you are completely MIRED in race and can't seem to get past it.

Any problem that has roots in racism was "not created by me, not my responsibility". Every issue where the notion of shared responsibility is suggested is "assigning blame". You have essentially set the bar so high for examples that nothing can possibly cross it, and having done so you can safely sit on your ass (figuratively) and do nothing to help solve the problems. You are doing the exact same thing as the black leaders you often decry - waiting for somebody else to solve it instead of pitching in.

Again, you're doing nothing but blaming me for disagreeing with you. I haven’t set any bar- you’ve merely snookered yourself into even believing I even have that power. You’re also just speculating and making up what you believe I have or haven’t done. TOTAL inside snow-job you’ve done to yourself. It’s a sad thing to witness.

People like you wipe your ass on the efforts of folks who lived through ACTUAL racial strife when you act like being disagreed with is 'racism'. If that's the worst that you face, you're a whining spoiled brat to constantly yell racism over it, and a disgrace to those that actually dealt with the real thing. Again, you can keep blaming people you've never even met for all of life’s problems, but you're only doing a number on yourself.

But there are plenty of examples. From infant mortality rates, to crime, to public education disparities, and on and on, there are piles of examples and real-world statistics that reflect the lingering consequences of past racism. These things affect all Americans and should be of concern no matter what your skin color. However, I'm sure not a single one of them would convince you that collective action is required - you'd probably just say "It has nothing to do with me, get off your ass and fix your own problems" no matter what evidence I provide that a problem is bigger than any individual or minority group to fix.

You are part of the reason this problem is so intractable.

This is rich. First of all, you don't have a SINGLE, SOLITARY solution to ANY real world problem, racial or otherwise. All you seem capable of is blaming others for things.

Secondly, it’s simply amazing what you’re pulling here. You're basically accusing me of: "You just want to say ‘why don't you get off your ass’..." then in the NEXT breath you're leveling that exact same charge YOURSELF with "You're the problem because you won't blah blah blah!"

That's simply an amazing piece of hypocrisy to witness!

Apparently, sociology doesn't exist in your world - the only time anyone can claim "racism" is if one individual person does something racist to another individual person.

You want racism defined as all of society being some house that isn’t fixed, so you can blame everyone who disagrees with your witless analogies as being not fixing the problem. You’ll have to excuse me that I don’t equate your ranting and redefining everything willy-nilly to fit lame analogies as either legit sociological issues, or anything at all useful in solving anyone’s problems.

[christ]

Originally Posted by OAW

...African-Americans weren't allowed to participate until 1970 ... almost 50 years later. And no African-American ever won the competition until 24 years after that in 1984.

14.

1984 is 14 years after 1970.

... and can someone please tell me why Miss Black America is still going?

... and if they allow whites in yet?

It sounds to me like MBA has been going for almost 50 years (well, almost 40), and 20+ years since Miss America became 'open', and white folk are still not allowed to participate. How is this not propagating racism?

(and yes, Gee, I read what you wrote, and if you think that you answered the question, you obviously hadn't read what you'd written)

[Doofy]

We have a "Music Of Black Origin" (MOBO) awards here, celebrating black artistes. Which puzzles me.

The usual argument is stated: Because whitey has his own awards (all of them that occur during the rest of the year).

But... ...it's then often stated that all pop/rock music is of black origin (as in US jazz/blues roots).

We don't have country music here, so the vast majority of popular music tends to have a 50:50 black/white mix. The MOBO awards weren't started until the early 90's (IIRC) - at which time plenty of black artistes were winning "normal" awards - so there's no "weren't allowed to participate in mainstream events" thing going on like there would be with "Miss Black America".

I don't get it.

And I also echo the previous comments: The sooner segregated stuff like this goes away, the better.

[Gee-Man]

Great atrocities were committed in the US, many years ago. Those who were guilty managed to escape justice for their acts. That will forever be a stain on the history of the US.

But it is too late for any real justice, at least as far as any secular standards go. The perpetrators are long dead, well beyond the reach of the judicial system to punish. So are their direct victims, for that matter, beyond our reach to compensate. Will we create further injustice, by forcing innocent people to pay for the crimes of their fathers? Or will we let go, refusing to meet the evils of the past with more evils from the present? No good can ever come from the cycle we're trapped in now; injustice leads to righteous indignitation, which is twisted into hatred, which leads to more injustice.

Letting go is simple. That does not mean it is easy; quite the opposite, actually. The simplest things in the world are often the hardest, and so it is with this. But there is no way around it if you ever want to reach the healing on the other side; the only way to go is through.

Although your post is beautifully written, I have to totally disagree with one of your assumptions. The fact is, what we're discussing (unless you're talking about slavery and not racism/Jim Crow/segregation) isn't that long ago. The perpetrators aren't long dead, and neither are their direct victims - they are very much alive.

Consider this. I am 36, and my parents are still very active and in their mid-60s. They directly experienced the worst kinds of racism, pretty much everything you heard about in the 50s and 60s they actually went through. That's just in my immediate family - people who directly experienced horrible racism the likes of which I have never seen and thankfully will not experience.

Similarly, there have been plenty of high-profile arrests of people who directly participated in racially-motivated murders during the civil-rights era. Edgar Ray Killen was arrested recently, and so was the killer of Medger Evers a while back. These people are also very much alive, and there are many more of them out there, hopefully not killers, but certainly active participants in the racist era.

Bottom line is, nowhere near enough time has passed for us to look back at racism through the "ancient history" lens. I look forward to that time, but it is not today - especially when the scars are still fresh.

[Gee-Man]

Crash,

Really, now. You're sidetracking the conversation by placing me in a box instead of discussing. The minute the phrase "your ilk" comes up you know the thread is turning for the worse. I suppose when you start discussing race around here, it's fairly predictable that might happen. I can't respond to most of your charges line-by-line, but I will say this as a general response:

Most of what you say is an attempt to pigeon-hole me into being one of those "race-baiters". Which, as I've observed around here, you have done before to anyone who has a different opinion than you on race. No, I do not blame racism whenever there's any problem, but I recognize that there are problems. No, I do not think people are racist because they don't agree with me, I have never levelled that charge at anyone, including you.

By the way, I didn't ignore your grand statement about taking care of your own life and wishing others would do the same. I agreed with you - in fact I said the exact same thing from the beginning. However, my adding on the simple notion that there are additional responsibilites we all share seems to bring up a rather violent disagreement from you. Fair enough - but why?

From your responses, my theory to explain this appears to be correct - you do not seem to believe in sociology, at least when applied to race. Your every response so far focuses exclusively on personal responsibility. You even re-wrote my story to make it about personal responsibility and nothing else, even though I spelled it out that both personal responsibility and shared responsibility are involved. You countered that there is no shared repsonsibility, period (similar to Spliffdaddy's point).

Well, personal responsibility is fine for many things, and is a requirement to solving many race-related problems. But along with personal responsibility, I happen to observe and conclude that there are also race-related problems that happen on a group level and/or sustain themselves on a group level (and require group effort to fix). I gave several short examples of problems that are not related to personal responsibility, and you simply skirted right past them: disparities in infant mortality rates, crime, education levels are all real problems that persist today that are rooted in past racism (even when adjusted for income level, which is itself an older problem that has some roots in racism).

Simply put, would you agree or disagree that these things require a group effort to solve?

[OAW]

Originally Posted by christ

14.

1984 is 14 years after 1970.

Indeed you are correct. That's what happens when you post after a long day at work and skip lunch!

Originally Posted by christ

... and can someone please tell me why Miss Black America is still going?

See the section of my post above regarding "ethnic pageants".

Originally Posted by christ

... and if they allow whites in yet?

It sounds to me like MBA has been going for almost 50 years (well, almost 40), and 20+ years since Miss America became 'open', and white folk are still not allowed to participate. How is this not propagating racism?

Well I did some digging and found these eligibility requirements for the Miss Black America pageant ....

In order to provide a fair and balanced pageant experience for all, we have set aside the following eligibility requirements.

ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS-Must be met by all

Must be a NATURAL BORN FEMALE.
Must be of good, moral character.
Must either reside in, attend school in , be employed in or were born in the area they are representing.
Must be at least 18 years of age.
Must be single and notCURRENTLY married or pregnant.
Mothers are allowed to participate in this division.

http://www.geocities.com/missblackam...igibility.html

And I also found these eligibility requirements for the similar Miss Black America USA pageant ...

To compete you must -

Be between the ages of 12 to 17, or 18 to 33 single/not married, or 25 and up married
Be a United States citizen
Be a natural born female
Meet residency requirements for competing in a certain town or state; either live in that city or state for more than 1 year, or currently enrolled in school in that city or state
Meet character criteria as set forth by the Miss Black America U.S.A Pageant
Be in reasonably good health to meet the job requirements throughout your reign
Be able to meet the time commitment and job responsibilities as set forth by the local program in which you compete and/or by the national program

Employees, officers, directors and agents of The Miss Black America U.S.A Pageant and/or of any of their respective licensees, assigns, parents, affiliated and subsidiary companies and the immediate family (spouse, mother, father, sister, brother, daughter, son, regardless of where they live) or members of their same households (whether related or not) of such employees, officers, directors and agents are not eligible to be contestants in The Miss Black America U.S.A Pageant System nor participate in this application process.

http://www.capitaledutainment.org/id45.html

So it appears that while the pageant is geared toward African-Americans, the eligibility requirements do not exclude those of other ethnicities. This is similar to the Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) that were setup to provide higher educational opportunities to African-Americans when they were actively and explicitly excluded from "mainstream" public and private colleges. Today such blatant exclusionary policies don't exist but HBCUs still remain and play a vital role in the higher education of African-Americans. And HBCUs do not exclude white students or other non-black ethnicities from admission. In fact, many HBCUs have significant, if not majority (e.g. Lincoln University ) white student populations.

So again, I contend that these are really silly debates. To truly have a productive discussion on the issue one must first be cognizant of the historical background surrounding the origins of such ethnic institutions and the reality that exists on the ground today ... and not get caught up in simplistic, straw-man arguments based upon the perceptions generated by having "Black" in the title.

OAW

[Gee-Man]

Originally Posted by Millennium

But is the rest of the "house" trashed, if we extend the metaphor? Perhaps you should make this clearer, because I know I don't see it, and I doubt I'm the only one who doesn't. What does the white brother's room represent? What does the black brother's room represent? What are the shared areas?

The "rooms" represent those racially-rooted problems that can be handled by personal responsibility and/or localized (not just geographic, but racial) effort. Organizations like the NAACP, United Negro College Fund, Head Start, local businesses, local anti-gang efforts, community projects, etc. are all things that the "black brother" needs to repair his "own room". You can't wait for somebody else to solve these things, you need to do it yourself.

Same applies to the "white brother", except the effects of past racism (parent's fighting and trashing the house) didn't affect his "room" as much, so there's less to fix. But there's issues still - white supremacy organizations still exist and have some traction in certain parts of the country, and housing segregation (the overt kind) are a couple of examples. And I believe there are people doing something about these "in their rooms".

The "shared areas" are more interesting. These are problems that affect everybody, and can't be solved by mere application of personal responsibility since they are too big and intractable for that. I mentioned a few of them to Crash Harddrive in my response: disparities in infant mortality rates, relative crime levels, education (from elementary school on), and to some degree, poverty. A child starting at a segregated school can't apply personal responsibility to overcome the inherent disadvantages of that school.

To me, having racial disparities in these areas should not be tolerated in our society and requires common effort to remove these differences.

Yes, exactly. I say the same, but not because of sociology. It would be foolish to say that racists do not exist in the US; of course there are a few. Believe me, I've had the misfortune of living near a couple training their children in that kind of vileness; it makes me sick to my stomach to remember it.

But it is equally foolish to claim that racism is still ingrained into our institutions. This is what anti-discrimination laws are for; to ensure that racism cannot regain the political power it once had. In a society where racists are frequently ridiculed and never taken seriously, can you honestly say that it has any truly insurmountable power? The day racism became a laughingstock was the day it was utterly defeated. The last vestiges are hunted down and eradicated, not through law but through society's own correction mechanisms, whenever they are found.

I'm not sure it was utterly defeated. Mostly defeated, yes. Driven out of common use, certainly. But some of it went "underground", and remains to this day. There are still raw nerves that get touched every so often - Hurricane Katrina comes to mind. Regardless of where you stand on what happened during that natural disaster, two things are absolutely true:

1) Race became an issue in everyone's mind during and after the hurricane, and it can't be blamed on either Kanye West or George Bush. People of all races were confronting and displaying their hidden (and not-so-hidden) racial attitudes without assistance from celebrities or politicians.
2) There were plenty of stories about absolute chaos and violence which turned out to be untrue almost to the last. However, I read almost no skepticism about these stories, from any side, left or right. Why is it that we were all so willing to believe the worst about people of color? The media is complicit in this, but it cannot be blamed on them entirely.

I'm using this as an example. This kind of thing doesn't have political power, so to speak, but it does have power of a different kind. It isn't illegal to feel a certain way about somebody (nor should it be), but you cannot deny that it can have an effect on how someone behaves.

I believe more time has to pass before these hidden prejudices start to dissipate. It's too early to declare victory in this area.

But we cannot allow racism to be replaced by more racism; no one would argue that this is at all productive. But the opposite of hate is apathy, not love, and the opposite of bias is blindness, not opposing bias. If you decide that this isn't what you want, then this is your prerogative, but if that is the case then know what you are advocating.

Blindness and apathy is exactly what I'm railing against. I would prefer that people see these problems as something we can solve quicker by working together. I would prefer that anyone who brings up legitimate grievances is not automatically dismissed as "playing the race card". However, there are many who use apathy and blindness and don't see a problem - as long as there are laws preventing overt discrimination, then the problem is solved and nothing more needs to be done collectively. Oh how I wish that were true.