[subego]

Cognitive behavioral therapy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the prime non-pharma treatment for mental illness.

It's a startlingly obvious concept. It boils down to: bad ideas make you sick... stop the bad ideas, you stop being sick.

How you stop the bad ideas is also startlingly obvious: address the bad idea with as objective an analysis as possible. Prove to yourself it's a bad idea (assuming of course, it is objectively a bad idea, like being a racist).

This is partially why I said PC is the opposite. PC asks you to internalize the bad idea and subject it to no analysis other than "how do I best cover my ass with my peers?"

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

bad ideas make you sick... stop the bad ideas, you stop being sick.

[andi*pandi]

There needed to be more variations.

white kid and black kid both dressed in polo shirts and khaki shorts, using the same innocent script.
white kid and black kid both dressed like thugs, acting guilty.

same for girls, and for good measure, some old guys.

I found it interesting, aside from the racism question, is in all cases how many people looked like they knew something fishy was going on, but didn't interfere until it got so blatant the kid admitted he was stealing it. People don't want to get involved, or risk confrontation. That's a problem with society caring about the rest of society.

Would the experiment have gone differently if there'd been a policeman standing around the corner, would more have reported the white kid? If a cantankerous old guy happened along in each scenario, would he have been on each kid's case just as bad?

[subego]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

One can take it upon themselves.

[OAW]

President Obama's video statement on the Zimmerman verdict:

Obama: 'Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago'; - The Washington Post

A very measured and reasoned response. Transcript here ....

Full transcript: Obama addresses race, profiling and Stand Your Ground - CNN.com

OAW

[subego]

Can I profile that as belonging in a different thread?

[OAW]

Given that he didn't delve into the particulars of the case but rather the larger issues of Racial Profiling I'd say it's appropriate here.

OAW

[Shaddim]

Recently, local residents were reminded of the brutal, racially-motivated hate crimes that were perpetrated only a couple dozen miles from where I live. It didn't make any waves, there was no national outrage, Jackson and Sharpton didn't come forward to denounce the torture, rape, and slayings of these two young people, Nancy Grace hasn't breathed a word about them over the last 6 years. The NAACP didn't make statements or send flowers to their funerals. Where are Obama and Holder to personally push a civil rights case for them? Like what was left of their bodies, which were found in multiple garbage bins (and the feces of the dogs the killers kept as pets), this case was hurriedly and purposely buried. People who acted with outrage over the lack of coverage were labeled as white supremacists and "Klansmen". Nationally, and even regionally, almost everyone looked the other way.

This could have been me when I was in college, taking a girlfriend out to dinner. No, not all blacks are like these animals, of course they aren't, but why hasn't there been any form of national discussion about this? Why doesn't anyone outside of our city care? There's been privilege going on, and it most certainly isn't "white" in this instance.

[OAW]

^^^^ Wow! Definitely never heard of that case. That was a savage crime anyway you slice it. You say there was "no national outrage". You say "Nationally, and even regionally everyone looked the other way." I'll take you at your word on that. And quite frankly, I find that surprising. If for no other reason than because I would have figured Fox News at least would have been all over this story. I guess they were too busy obsessing over the New Black Panther Party with its grand total of 5-10 members to notice.

OAW

[Shaddim]

You didn't just shift the blame for the media blackout in <7 sentences, did you?

Nobody gives a f*** about these youngsters who were carjacked, gangraped, tortured for days, and then discarded like garbage, it obviously wasn't newsworthy as it could stir up racial hostility (though a shitstorm over T Martin is "good for America"). Maybe it lacked the Skittles factor, but likely it was simply so horrifying that no one outside of this city wanted to acknowledge it, for fear of blowback from certain political groups, who felt that such a story could negatively impact a presidential campaign that was about to be announced. I'm not saying that's true, but the timing looks suspect (Jan 2007).

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by subego 

Cognitive behavioral therapy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the prime non-pharma treatment for mental illness.

Ok let's pretend that racism is (like) a mental illness, and can be treated like any other...

It's a startlingly obvious concept. It boils down to: bad ideas make you sick... stop the bad ideas, you stop being sick.

Does racism make the racist sick? What are the symptoms? It seems to me that racism generally makes people feel better about themselves, not feel sick.

How you stop the bad ideas is also startlingly obvious: address the bad idea with as objective an analysis as possible. Prove to yourself it's a bad idea (assuming of course, it is objectively a bad idea, like being a racist).

It seems to me that if a person was receptive to the logic that racism is objectively irrational, then they wouldn't need any treatment, as they could simply decide to stop letting themselves fall for the irrational rhetoric. In that case, anyone who is still racist will be hard to convince that racism is an objectively bad idea. This is not surprising, as fairness is not a rational ideal, it is a moral idea. Morals are not subject to logic; either you embrace them or you don't. Basically all morals are enforced by nothing more than social pressure (same as PCness).

This is partially why I said PC is the opposite. PC asks you to internalize the bad idea and subject it to no analysis other than "how do I best cover my ass with my peers?"

I'm not convinced, but let's just cut through all the assumptions on either side: is there any evidence that this technique works, on actual racists? Has it ever been tried?

[OAW]

Not shifting blame at all. It's a local story. In Knoxville, TN at that. Which outside of college basketball isn't a source for much national coverage one way or the other. People get raped and killed all the time and it never makes it past the local news. Unless ... it's particularly horrific crime or there is a racial angle so egregious that it generates protests. This crime had the horrific aspect in spades without question. But it still didn't go national. As for your conspiratorial leanings ... all I can say is think about it man. Even Fox News didn't cover it on their NATIONAL PLATFORM and a story like this is right up their alley. Scaring white people to get top ratings is what they do! I surmise that if there was a way to tie this to Obama they surely would have had they known about it. Just did a cursory Google search and it doesn't even seem like the Drudge Report picked up on this.

OAW

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Nobody gives a f*** about these youngsters who were carjacked, gangraped, tortured for days, and then discarded like garbage,

Obviously society cared enough about it to catch and punish their killers. Stories get a lot more attention when the justice system fails the victims, or when it seems like there's a good chance it's about to. When the system is working, less people pay attention.

The trayvon martin case has been so good at attracting attention because (many believe) justice wasn't served. If zimmerman had been arrested and charged on the first try, the story wouldn't have blown up the way it did.

it obviously wasn't newsworthy as it could stir up racial hostility (though a shitstorm over T Martin is "good for America"). Maybe it lacked the Skittles factor, but likely it was simply so horrifying that no one outside of this city wanted to acknowledge it, for fear of blowback from certain political groups, who felt that such a story could negatively impact a presidential campaign that was about to be announced. I'm not saying that's true, but the timing looks suspect (Jan 2007).

Were there no conservative or anti-Obama media outlets back in 2007? It seems to me they have/had no trouble manufacturing scandals and sob stories designed to lampoon Obama. Maybe my memory is just fuzzy, and they were actually controlled by the liberal elite after all.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

Ok let's pretend that racism is (like) a mental illness, and can be treated like any other...


Does racism make the racist sick? What are the symptoms? It seems to me that racism generally makes people feel better about themselves, not feel sick.



It seems to me that if a person was receptive to the logic that racism is objectively irrational, then they wouldn't need any treatment, as they could simply decide to stop letting themselves fall for the irrational rhetoric. In that case, anyone who is still racist will be hard to convince that racism is an objectively bad idea. This is not surprising, as fairness is not a rational ideal, it is a moral idea. Morals are not subject to logic; either you embrace them or you don't. Basically all morals are enforced by nothing more than social pressure (same as PCness).



I'm not convinced, but let's just cut through all the assumptions on either side: is there any evidence that this technique works, on actual racists? Has it ever been tried?

I could be mistaken, but I think we're discussing two different things.

I thought the whole point of the video was to show how people aren't conscious of their own racist behavior. I don't think this park was some racist enclave in Georgia or something. These were everyday people, and I'm sure if you asked them they would (honestly) answer they thought racism was wrong.

I am fully capable of displaying the type of racism shown in the video. Yet I believe racism is bad. Does that not disprove your claim? Are not I an actual racist upon which this has been tested?

If I was completely unaware of this phenomenon, and had no idea how to combat it, I'd be more of a racist.

Shit. I'm less of a racist now than I was when this thread started because I'm actually exploring my racism, which I haven't really done for years, and has kinda fallen right back to the biology. I don't deal with a lot of black people, so I'm kinda uncomfortable around them for no rational reason.

These things change though. I dated a black woman for five years, so I was far more comfortable back then, but that was 20 years ago. Right now, my closest black friend is OAW.

[Shaddim]

Oh yeah, all kinds of justice in the Channon Christian murders. Right. Thanks to all for spending a couple seconds to read up on that case, even though it isn't as much of a media darling. Peace and unity to all, despite the evil crackers.

[andi*pandi]

I read what I could stand of the story, it is horrible. If snopes is up to date her killers are up for retrial due to a drunk judge. Stupid. So maybe she and her boyfriend have not got the justice they deserve.

But the cases are not similar. No one is arguing that Christian Shannon is not a victim. What made the Zimmerman story sensational is that doubt/argument of who is the victim.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

I read what I could stand of the story, it is horrible. If snopes is up to date her killers are up for retrial due to a drunk judge. Stupid. So maybe she and her boyfriend have not got the justice they deserve.

But the cases are not similar. No one is arguing that Christian Shannon is not a victim. What made the Zimmerman story sensational is that doubt/argument of who is the victim.

Largely I'm wondering where the so-called White Privilege was when this hit the media and then slid off like an egg on hot Teflon. Though, I suppose it was Fox News' job to report on white people who were murdered (after being raped and butchered) by blacks, since it doesn't appear to be the other networks' responsibility. But hell, there was no attention because "nothing happens in Knoxville" to be worthy of notice, like Seminole county Fla is some culturally-rich, cosmopolitan Mecca.

[Uncle Skeleton]

I question your implicit premise that justice isn't justice if it doesn't come with a media circus on top. Back in my day, justice was measured by trial and sentencing, not by how much of the infotainment pie one could claim. In fact, the media gawkers used to be thought of as tacky and unwelcome, not a prize to be pursued.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by subego 

I could be mistaken, but I think we're discussing two different things.

Highly likely

I thought the whole point of the video was to show how people aren't conscious of their own racist behavior. I don't think this park was some racist enclave in Georgia or something. These were everyday people, and I'm sure if you asked them they would (honestly) answer they thought racism was wrong.

That is not inconsistent with political correctness nor with psychotherapy. Both presume that racism is a preexisting condition and won't go away without conscious attention.

I am fully capable of displaying the type of racism shown in the video. Yet I believe racism is bad. Does that not disprove your claim?

You are also fully capable of the normal kind of racism. The reason you don't (if you're like most people) is because PC has made it simpler for you to train yourself not to. PC is like flashcards that make it easier for you to memorize the most common racist patterns to more easily avoid them (if you are so inclined). It's so you don't have to reason out every behavior from first-principles to figure out whether it's racist or not, it's shorthand so you can just simply say "oh yeah, that's un-PC, I don't do that stuff." It's like multiplication tables, it's simpler just to memorize them than to re-derive them each time you need to use one.

The behavior pattern in the video is small potatoes so it didn't make it into the current flashcard deck. We could add it to the deck, and then you wouldn't do that behavior anymore.

Does that not disprove your claim? Are not I an actual racist upon which this has been tested?

You've lost me. Either:
1) you have received actual CBT from a therapist
2) you have received actual CBT from a computer
3) CBT was a tangent and you were referring merely to something like it for the context of this thread
4) CBT was a tangent and you wanted someone to adapt it to the context of this thread, but it hasn't been done yet, least of all to you personally
5) you are receptive to CBT (or similar) but are NOT receptive to PCness
6) you are receptive to CBT (or similar) and are ALSO receptive to PCness

Furthermore, the outcome of your experience, whatever it was, has not been stated. Can you please describe what methods you tried, in order to correct your internally perceived racism, and which of those methods were successful (as measured how) and which were failures?

Basically, I have been working under the perception that you are suggesting something, either CBT formally or something derived from it, and that thing can succeed either (A) where PC cannot, or (B) with fewer negative side effects than PC. I can identify no evidence that you yourself are an example of either of those. Are you? If so which, and what is the evidence that distinguishes the effectiveness or side-effects of PC vs CBT?

Shit. I'm less of a racist now than I was when this thread started because I'm actually exploring my racism, which I haven't really done for years, and has kinda fallen right back to the biology.

The scenario went unrecognized. Now that it's recognized, it can be accounted for by either method. Now that you've explored it, you will undoubtedly add it to a list of pre-defined scenarios, for easier recall. I don't see how that is fundamentally more effective than for it to be added to an external list of pre-defined scenarios, which most people refer to as political correctness.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

I question your implicit premise that justice isn't justice if it doesn't come with a media circus on top. Back in my day, justice was measured by trial and sentencing, not by how much of the infotainment pie one could claim. In fact, the media gawkers used to be thought of as tacky and unwelcome, not a prize to be pursued.

The media circus over TM was/is ridiculous, as are the protests (if I see another photo of an innocent, grinning 13 y/o Trayvon in the media I'm going to vomit). There are much worse acts that are blatantly ignored. Right now, if a black couple were abducted by whites or latinos, raped, tortured, dismembered, then murdered (in that order) there would be nationwide riots the likes of which have never been seen before in this country and the government would declare a state of emergency. The Christian/Newsom case didn't even prompt a discussion, hell, it didn't even make national news, just a small op-ed piece on the 8th page of the "Crime Beat" section of the Atlanta Journal-Con. Then the next day they were lambasted by "community leaders" for trying to "stir-up racial tension".

How about a national dialog on the staggering number of black on black murders (let alone black on white)? Burglary? Gang violence? Drug dealing? or even truancy? Is Blacksplaining when blacks incorrectly blame other ethnic groups for all their problems, and shift the responsibility for fixing it on to others (and then gripe that those same folks are "meddling in their business")?

Let's play misdirection and discuss an uncommon occurrence, a latino/white shooting a black man, ad nauseum, despite all the evidence that shows Martin was beating on the guy who shot him. Why didn't Martin just walk up to the community appointed Neighborhood Watch Captain and say, "Hey, what's up man? I'm just heading back to my mom's house", instead of acting even more suspicious and getting pissed off at the "creepy-assed cracker"? Where in the f*** was Trayvon's father then? Why wasn't he trying to be a proper role model, teaching his son how to be polite to an elder? Since he was a minor, why wasn't his mother calling him to find out where he was, out in the middle of the night, during a storm? It's a hell of alot easier to shift blame in the shadow of a tragedy, it's simpler than reflecting on what a piss-poor parent and example you were to your kid.

Pastor Ken Hutcherson to Rev. Al Sharpton: ‘Not Again’ | TheBlaze.com

I think I have the right to tell you this sir; I think the likes of you and Jesse Jackson have done more damage to the black race than any white man will ever accomplish. You see as long as you can produce an ethnicity with a victim mentality to keep them in poverty, as the two of you get richer – you know like poverty pimps – and convince them that it is the white man’s fault because he has his boot on their necks, and as long as you teach our beautiful black women that there is a government out there to be their baby’s daddy, the two of you win. You are the self-proclaimed, appointed leaders of the black people. How we as black people have swallowed the lie that we have to have certain black leaders to get on the government teat escapes me.

I have to tell you Al, I have seen your work, it has been weighed, it has been measured, and it has been found wanting.

But wait, he's now labeled an "Uncle Tom" and "house n***er", because he voiced an opinion and spoke his mind. Obviously Rev. Hutcherson sold out to "the man", and his 30 pieces of silver are the numerous death threats he receives each month (he has 1st Amendment rights, like anyone else). Maybe if just rolled over and went to the "other side", he could become a millionaire like Sharpton and Jackson?

[subego]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

Highly likely


That is not inconsistent with political correctness nor with psychotherapy. Both presume that racism is a preexisting condition and won't go away without conscious attention.


You are also fully capable of the normal kind of racism. The reason you don't (if you're like most people) is because PC has made it simpler for you to train yourself not to. PC is like flashcards that make it easier for you to memorize the most common racist patterns to more easily avoid them (if you are so inclined). It's so you don't have to reason out every behavior from first-principles to figure out whether it's racist or not, it's shorthand so you can just simply say "oh yeah, that's un-PC, I don't do that stuff." It's like multiplication tables, it's simpler just to memorize them than to re-derive them each time you need to use one.

The behavior pattern in the video is small potatoes so it didn't make it into the current flashcard deck. We could add it to the deck, and then you wouldn't do that behavior anymore.



You've lost me. Either:
1) you have received actual CBT from a therapist
2) you have received actual CBT from a computer
3) CBT was a tangent and you were referring merely to something like it for the context of this thread
4) CBT was a tangent and you wanted someone to adapt it to the context of this thread, but it hasn't been done yet, least of all to you personally
5) you are receptive to CBT (or similar) but are NOT receptive to PCness
6) you are receptive to CBT (or similar) and are ALSO receptive to PCness

Furthermore, the outcome of your experience, whatever it was, has not been stated. Can you please describe what methods you tried, in order to correct your internally perceived racism, and which of those methods were successful (as measured how) and which were failures?

Basically, I have been working under the perception that you are suggesting something, either CBT formally or something derived from it, and that thing can succeed either (A) where PC cannot, or (B) with fewer negative side effects than PC. I can identify no evidence that you yourself are an example of either of those. Are you? If so which, and what is the evidence that distinguishes the effectiveness or side-effects of PC vs CBT?



The scenario went unrecognized. Now that it's recognized, it can be accounted for by either method. Now that you've explored it, you will undoubtedly add it to a list of pre-defined scenarios, for easier recall. I don't see how that is fundamentally more effective than for it to be added to an external list of pre-defined scenarios, which most people refer to as political correctness.

What?

I'm older than the PC movement, and wasn't the other kind of racist (we'll call it "racist minus") when the movement started. PC hasn't altered my racism (minus or plus), it's just made really good jokes you could get away with in the 70's impossible now (e.g. Mandingo 2 on SNL).

As for CBT:

1) I have received it from a doctor (for anxiety).
2) I have received it from a book.
3) I have not received it in a house
4) I have not received it from a mouse.

The thing with CBT, is it's so unbelievably simple, you don't need a doctor or some type of therapist. If you have a functioning brain, you can for the most part do it yourself. I explained the whole thing in a few sentences. The actual method you use would take a couple more sentences. All I personally needed was someone who knew what they were talking about (a psychiatrist in this case) tell me it's legit, and has had a bajillion studies showing it worked. It seemed too simple, and I was skeptical.

That's the irony of it. it's so simple you're claiming I haven't described the methods as they relate to racism. I have. I'm guessing it's just too simple or obvious seeming for you to think this is an actual, proven method of significant behavioral change.

Force yourself to look at how you interact with people of another race objectively.

If you're not forcing yourself, you are not being objective. Your brain will seduce you with the idea "I am not racist minus, hence I am viewing things objectively". Well, in my personal experience, not being racist minus isn't enough. You need to be actively combating it.

PC is the opposite of actively combatting it. It's actively internalizing it.


When you talk about adding this to the list of scenarios, that's not the effect this thread has had. As I said, the issue I'm investigating is why I feel uncomfortable around black people in general. Which I do. A scenario of people acting like clowns in the park is so unusual as to be useless.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by subego 

What?

I'm older than the PC movement, and wasn't the other kind of racist (we'll call it "racist minus") when the movement started.

Ok that's fine. I'm comfortable with "racist plus" being included when I said earlier that a generation ago people didn't even try to not be racist.

PC hasn't altered my racism (minus or plus)

Evidence?

, it's just made really good jokes you could get away with in the 70's impossible now (e.g. Mandingo 2 on SNL).

BTW it's on netflix. Season 3, episode 12, 52 minutes in (right?). I don't think I get the joke though.

I submit that not being able to make those jokes anymore, and one's acceptance of the prohibition on them, is an alteration of one's racism (minus or plus).

As for CBT:

1) I have received it from a doctor (for anxiety).
2) I have received it from a book.
3) I have not received it in a house
4) I have not received it from a mouse.

I lolled. But seriously, did you never receive it for your racism (such as it is)? What control did you do in this little experiment to show you were not affected equally by PCness? To put it another way, how can an objective outsider identify or quantify the difference in performance between PC and CBT, based on this trial?

CBT is so unbelievably simple... I explained the whole thing in a few sentences.

Let's not get ahead of ourselves. What you did in a few sentences was enough to explain it to someone who already knows it (like preaching to the choir). I am trying to follow along, and fill in the gaps using context as I go. But I am not there yet, and I still have little idea what you're talking about.

and has had a bajillion studies showing it worked.

Do any of those studies show it worked on racism? Or on another wannabe disease/disorder, like homophobia or bullying (things that don't hurt the patient, only hurt people the patient doesn't even like)?

That's the irony of it. it's so simple you're claiming I haven't described the methods as they relate to racism. I have.

No, not the methods, the outcome. The results. Have you described those? Not just "it worked," but convince me using objective evidence.

I'm guessing it's just too simple or obvious seeming for you to think this is an actual, proven method of significant behavioral change.

If it was really all that simple and proven, there wouldn't still be racism.

PC is the opposite of actively combatting it. It's actively internalizing it.

I don't know what that means as you're using it. If you internalize a new condition that conflicts with one of your previous conditions, then the two will combat each other from time to time. For example I have internalized the new condition that I will eat less, skip meals, cut sweets, and experience the biological sensation of hunger as a regular occurrence. This conflicts with my previous biological condition of gluttony and uninterrupted satiety. From time to time the conditions fight each other, and I "actively" choose sides. I usually choose the side of my new condition, therefore I am actively combatting my old condition. My internalization of the new rules isn't the opposite of "actively combatting" my biology, it's compatible with it, even facilitates it.

When you talk about adding this to the list of scenarios, that's not the effect this thread has had.

I didn't say it happened, I said it could be made to happen. Don't you think it could?

As I said, the issue I'm investigating is why I feel uncomfortable around black people in general. Which I do.

More to the point, are you saying that CBT would/will/did cure you of this?

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by subego 

The thing with CBT, is it's so unbelievably simple, you don't need a doctor or some type of therapist. If you have a functioning brain, you can for the most part do it yourself. I explained the whole thing in a few sentences. The actual method you use would take a couple more sentences. All I personally needed was someone who knew what they were talking about (a psychiatrist in this case) tell me it's legit, and has had a bajillion studies showing it worked. It seemed too simple, and I was skeptical.

That's the irony of it. it's so simple you're claiming I haven't described the methods as they relate to racism. I have. I'm guessing it's just too simple or obvious seeming for you to think this is an actual, proven method of significant behavioral change.

I want to expand on this for a minute, this "but it's so simple" argument and why I am so critical of it. Just in case you're having as much difficulty reading me here as I am having reading you (if you're not, feel free to ignore this post). You could say the same thing about the microwave oven: it's so simple. You just push "go" and it cooks what's inside. That's the irony of it. It's so simple you're claiming I haven't described its methods, but I already have and that's all there is to it. You just think it's too simple or too obvious to be true.

That would be true, in that anyone who already knows that the microwave works in the appropriate context is going to nod their head and say "yep, that's it exactly." But that information is sorely inadequate to tell anyone something they don't already know. It's false in the sense that people who use it are ignoring their knowledge of its limitations and deficiencies. They can be induced to say "oh yeah duh it won't work for that" (like metal, baking bread, cooking anything hotter than 100C or anything with no conductance, or anything smaller than the wavelength of a microwave (about the size of a popcorn kernel)), which they wouldn't even necessarily know if they hadn't tried it. If you are in a situation where you don't already know that that tool will be effective against the specific problem at hand, then saying "it just works because it's so simple nothing could go wrong" tells them nothing. The only way people can know that it will work for a certain application is to try it. In that application. It works for soup, but does it work for pizza? For baking a cake? For cooking a steak? Seeing it in action is how every user learned the abilities of the tool, despite its pseudo-simplicity. And before there were any experienced users, for the inventor, you can be damn sure it was a lot more complicated than the "stick food in and it just goes" description.

I just want to see whether "it" works by someone trying it. All else is functionally irrelevant. If there is some theory that the success at boiling soup will be transferrable to reheating pizza, or that the success at anxiety or arachnophobia will be transferrable to racism, it's really meaningless without the field-test. Pseudo-simplicity doesn't change that.

[subego]

I actually was about to thow this out because I think it's long and boring, but since it directly relates to your follow-up post, it looks like now you're stuck with it.



Here. Let me relate my experience with it, which I think will help show where I'm coming from.

I went to a psychiatrist for (as I mentioned) anxiety. Now, there were various ways this was affecting me, but as it got worse, a specific problem arose which I was sick of dealing with.

As long as I could remember, I'd be thinking about whatever, and my brain would free-associate with some embarrassing experience in my past. I assume this has happened to you before.

With me, it got to the point where it was happening more than a dozen times a day. I tend to be a "suck it up" type person, but it started becoming difficult to function.

My coping mechanism up to that point had been to stuff those feelings away. This is one reason why I, perhaps incorrectly, associate PC with what CBT is supposed to treat. I see PC as analogous to my previous coping mechanism. Stuff it away.

Now, I'm a little uncomfortable talking about my therapy, not because it's private, but the treatment was so simple, effective, and quick to work, you're going to be tempted to say it wasn't therapy, it was me deciding to stop being an idiot.

Here's how you apply it to a problem like my anxiety, though you can extrapolate it to almost anything (like one's racism plus).

Take an example of the issue as it happens, such as an intrusive, embarrassing recollection.

Catalog the "automatic thoughts". That sounds like some bullshit psychiatric term (which I guess it is), but it has a nice practical definition. Automatic thoughts are the thoughts which pop into your head automatically when you receive a particular stimulus.

I'll share one of the most anxiety inducing events which did (and still does) pop into my head, so you can get an idea of what's meant by these automatic thoughts.

15 years ago I was doing lighting for a band at a live show. Not for the venue, but for a video we were filming of one of the bands. I slid over a decimal point in my head and it turned out we didn't have enough power. The circuit breaker tripped during the show. A live show. No pause, no backsies.

It was really bad.

What were the automatic thoughts here? You can probably guess them:

I'm stupid. I'm embarrassed. I'm too much of a ****up to do this job. I let down the band. I let down my boss. My boss was my friend. He hired me and everyone else because we were friends. I let down my friends.

All (and I really mean all) CBT is, is taking those automatic thoughts and subjecting them to analysis.

Did I get fired?
Did my boss stop being my friend?
Did my boss get really angry afterwards?
Did I feel like the rest of the crew was blaming me?
Did they stop being my friends?

The answer to all of these was no, and that was enough to eliminate the anxiety it was causing. I could (and did) rinse and repeat with the other intrusive recollections, and it disappeared almost overnight.

[subego]

I'll whip up another post which continues this on to the topic of racism. I just hadn't got to that part yet, thought it was already too long, have work later, there was a fire, an earthquake, a flood...

IT WASN'T MY FAULT!!!

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by subego 

Here. Let me relate my experience with it, which I think will help show where I'm coming from.

Thanks, I do appreciate you sharing your private example. I don't want to shit all over it, but I still want it to do the most good it can, so I'm going to go ahead and press you about it and cross my fingers that it doesn't come across as argumentative. This is supposed to be constructive criticism.

...you can extrapolate it to almost anything (like one's racism plus).

I don't think you've provided sufficient support for this claim. My upcoming questions are intended to fill in the gaps in that support.

To assume the therapy works the same way, we have to assume that the "disease" is analogous. You wanted to stop being anxious, and were unable to stop with mere willpower. Do racists want to stop? But they can't? I don't think that they want to, and I don't think there's usually anything preventing them from stopping if they choose to (do you have evidence that either of these beliefs are wrong?). You also were aware of your anxiety (obviously), and would never be able to seek a remedy without being made aware of it. Are racists aware of their bias? In OAW's video they weren't. You also described racists in general as believing they weren't even racists, therefore thinking they are acting objectively. If they aren't aware of the problem, then how are they supposed to apply this method?

Take an example of the issue as it happens, such as an intrusive, embarrassing recollection.

What do you imagine the racism-equivalent to this being? Like a black kid stealing a bike? A white person deciding not to steal a bike? Help us readers out a little here.

All (and I really mean all) CBT is, is taking those automatic thoughts and subjecting them to analysis.

Did I get fired?
Did my boss stop being my friend?
Did my boss get really angry afterwards?
Did I feel like the rest of the crew was blaming me?
Did they stop being my friends?

What's the racism equivalent here? I can't even imagine. Maybe if I had the first answer then I could take some guesses at this one.

[subego]

No offense taken whatsoever!

That was the gist of my quick follow-up. I didn't get to the racism part when I decided to trash the post. Then I saw your follow-up post and decided to post it anyways.

I'll finish it (i.e. link it to racism) after I'm done at work.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by subego 

That was the gist of my quick follow-up. I didn't get to the racism part ...
I'll finish it (i.e. link it to racism) after I'm done at work.

Oh I get it now.

Now I have to wait patiently and it's all your fault? I'm outraged!

[ebuddy]

In the other thread we've explored the issue of Racial Profiling as it relates to the events surrounding the Trayvon Martin - George Zimmerman controversy. Some of us see it as a textbook example of the phenomenon:

Racial Profiling - the use of race or ethnicity as grounds for suspecting someone of having committed or being in the process of committing an offense.
While others swear on a stack of Bibles that it wasn't a "racial issue". Which brings up a clever new term that has recently exploded on social media:

Profiling is real IMO and we've agreed DWB is such an example. What's frustrating to me is the prevalence of it among the black community upon itself, suggesting it's more innate. i.e. while it's certainly not fair for whites to exploit privilege, it's also not fair to wield this indictment loosely. Let me 'splain...

Whitesplaining - The paternalistic lecture given by Whites toward a person of color defining what should and shouldn't be considered racist, while obliviously exhibiting their own racism.

When Dr. Laura Schlessinger used the N-Word eleven times on her radio program, it was to explain to an African-American guest why they shouldn't be offended by it's usage; that patronizing rant was yet another example of White-'splaining.
Or alternatively .....

I do not have the context of that discussion, but I'm of the firm belief that whites simply shouldn't can't use that word.

Whitesplain - The act of a caucasian person explaining to audiences of color the true nature of racism; a caucasian person explaining sociopolitical events and/or history to audiences of color as though they are ignorant children; a caucasian person explaining to audiences of color that what they think will benefit themselves and their families and communities will in fact harm them, and vice versa.

I saw two interesting things in the above points OAW that I think absolutely need to be mentioned because they illustrate a point I'm not sure can be addressed by conscientious white people;

• paternalistic; If your identity is mired entirely in ancestral subservience, you will perceive that you are being talked down to, but the interesting thing to observe is that this will always be defined exclusively by whether or not the lecturer is expressing a view that challenges one's partisan sensitivities or presuppositions. In other words, any explanation given by a white to a black or any expression of knowledge that might indicate a conservative lean could well be defined as whitesplaining. The same metric would not apply to a Harry Reid, a Joe Biden, or Bill Clinton; not that one couldn't cite examples of their whitesplaining mind you, but that they had expressed the preferred ideology -- telling people what their itching, partisan ears wanted to hear. Otherwise, this is how one perceives one's self, having little to nothing to do with the lecture or lecturers.
• "explaining sociopolitical events and/or history to audiences of color as though they are ignorant children". I'm trying to determine how this perception occurs, the genesis moment. Does it not have at least some small part to do with how on perceives one's self? And shouldn't this thought exercise include some attempt to understand one another? i.e. This is how whites talk to one another. Square I know, but this isn't sufficient cause to necessarily take it personally or perceive yourself as in a lower position and then project onto your speaker that he is producing the feelings of low self-worth. In fairness, if you can produce an example of a Democrat whitesplaining, I'll drop my line of reasoning. Otherwise, the term seems to be little more than "white-speak" that offends partisan sensitivities.

Secondly, "white" is the operative root of whitesplaining. This means black lecturers can perform this same act ad nauseum and of course, being of color it cannot be adequately defined as whitesplaining. Interesting to me that the most apt word for defining an aspect of racism, must itself be inherently racist. IMO, these terms are counterproductive and will never lead to a post-racial society. If an African-American does it, he's an Uncle Tom; a sellout. If a white person does it, it's whitesplaining. This way, the partisan never has to accept or acknowledge anything he may disagree with because the opposing viewpoint has already been compartmentalized into a distasteful figure bearing the burden of a most horrific history he had nothing to do with; becoming for the partisan a type of propaganda machine that never displeases. There's another phenomena today and that is that a truly post-racial society would bad for business; those whose careers are predicated on race and racial sensitivity. Of course, it would be "whitesplaining" to cite Booker T Washington on this phenomena 100 years ago.

I never noticed how many VW Vanagons there were on the road until I bought one. Being keenly aware of their existence, I began to acknowledge several of them a week. Feel me? If your eyes are moving to and fro looking for offenses of this kind or that, you will see them. Lots of them. You will not see them when the (D) comes to speak because you're not looking for them, but you would be able to seize on any number of these distasteful examples among Republicans. Why? First and foremost, because they're Republicans and... you know how they are.

U.S. Senator Rand Paul whitesplained to students at Howard University that a black Republican founded the NAACP.

One of the more common complaints I hear about Republicans is how generally unavailable they are to the black community. Here we are in front of a historically black University proudly citing the Republican contribution to civil rights including what was once a strong voice for it (something I personally believe needs to be reiterated early and often) and... it's whitesplaining. Proof the only way to win is not to play... if you're a Republican. Any number of lilly-white Democrats can come in, add a little swag to their phrasing in the most patronizing manner imaginable, reminding black audiences of the Democratic role in civil liberties, and it's met with applause.

"'We know our history,' Hay said of Paul's question. 'This is now; that was in the past.'"

In a day and age where too many struggle to cite the Vice President of the US or basic historical facts even in the collegiate atmosphere, I don't think this is patronizing for Rand to say nor do I think it can be assumed that; "we know our history" merely by virtue of the fact that the audience is black.

So I'd thought I'd juxtapose these two with another phenomenon we see in our society:

White privilege - refers to the set of societal privileges that white people are argued to benefit from beyond those commonly experienced by people of color in the same social, political, or economic spaces (nation, community, workplace, income, etc.). The term denotes both obvious and less obvious unspoken advantages that white individuals may not recognize they have, which distinguishes it from overt bias or prejudice. These include cultural affirmations of one's own worth; greater presumed social status; and freedom to move, buy, work, play, and speak freely. The concept of white privilege also implies the right to assume the universality of one's own experiences, marking others as different or exceptional while perceiving oneself as normal. It can be compared and/or combined with the concept of male privilege.

What, in your view, is the solution to the above phenomena? I think this is little more than a complex way of perpetuating low self-worth by maintaining a narrative that neither seeks nor wants progress of any real kind.

I think this is what concerns me most about all of this. I can't possibly imagine how identifying whitsplaining and "white privilege" facilitates progress -- of any kind. Ultimately, isn't the indictment of "white privilege" really just talking down to the 15+% white people living in poverty? Do you think this privilege is perceived as such to underemployed whites or whites working for peanuts to keep their heads above poverty? The guy still working concrete at 46 years old with no retirement wondering what he's going to do when he's 55? (my own brother) Do you really think they feel exceptional? Culturally affirmed? Ingrained with self- worth or enjoying a social status of any kind? Do you really think the ones keeping their mouths shut at work feel like they have freedom to speak? No, because without the abusive job, you also have no freedom to move, buy, or play. If this is what privilege looks like for whites, it must be a heavy crown with a suicide rate second only to Native Americans in the US.

I mean, you can certainly continue to cite the "white privilege" phenomena, just know that it will continue to make zero sense to at least 65% of the white people you're talking to. I'm just sayin'.

Because we are so keenly aware of our history, we also clearly know what today is NOT. We have to try to understand one another today. As long as we're berating one another and picking at one another's ethnic quirks; pay no attention to the White African-American man behind the curtain.

Sorry, you specifically requested that we move beyond the Zimmerman case.

So with that as a backdrop check out this video ... it's a smudge under 5 minutes long .... and post your thoughts. My intent here is to spark a reasoned discussion about these issues in general and not just a rehash of the controversies surrounding the GZ trial. Trolls or anyone without anything substantive to contribute need not apply. And if you are one who is inclined to set your hair on fire whenever such topics are even raised then in all likelihood the shoe fits.

Know Anyone Who Thinks Racial Profiling Is Exaggerated? Watch This, And Tell Me When Your Jaw Drops.

Given that these sort of experiments are remarkably consistent in the results they produce, what does that say to you about the society we live in?

OAW

Does this video do a sufficient job of demonstrating how black people feel about themselves? Do they not profile one another? How trusting are they of one another? To me, this is critical. As long as the feelings of low self-worth are perpetuated within the black community through defeatist rhetoric, you don't need to repeatedly point at white people because they can't possibly begin to address that problem anyway. No... I think progress is what we'd all like to see.

It should be noted, I'd have likely helped a hot black woman steal the bicycle. Don't judge me.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by OAW 

President Obama's video statement on the Zimmerman verdict:

Obama: 'Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago'; - The Washington Post

A very measured and reasoned response. Transcript here ....

Full transcript: Obama addresses race, profiling and Stand Your Ground - CNN.com

OAW

If I had a son, he would have looked like Antonio Santiago



Georgia teens indicted in death of 13-month-old boy - CNN.com

Brunswick, Georgia (CNN) -- A Glynn County, Georgia, grand jury indicted two teenage defendants in the death of a 13-month-old boy, the district attorney announced Wednesday.

some one has some splainin' to do

Georgia Baby Shooting Update: James Henry Brooks, Brunswick city official, arrested for obstruction and influencing a witness - Crimesider - CBS News

(CBS/AP) ATLANTA - A Georgia city official was arrested Thursday on charges of obstructing enforcement and influencing a witness in the case involving the fatal shooting of a one-year-old boy.

I'm puzzled why Nancy Grace/HLN/ Tru TV hasn't made this the newest trial of the moment.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

If I had a son, he would have looked like Antonio Santiago



Georgia teens indicted in death of 13-month-old boy - CNN.com

This family does not have broadcasters specifically geared toward his "culture"; a place to memorialize these injustices. Their son could not have looked forward to a scholarship based on his skin tone anyway or any means of securing employment for such a condition, and no hate-crime application of law for his death; this white family can rest easy knowing their privilege will get them through.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

Their son could not have looked forward to a scholarship based on his skin tone anyway or any means of securing employment for such a condition,

Doesn't free bikes count?

[andi*pandi]

The Santiago case is not sensational because their guilt over the horrific and senseless killing is undeniable. They were convicted. There's no whodunit mystery for Nancy Grace to insinuate about. She prefers cases where the perp is a family member - best for moral outrage. She is a hack.

I don't think white privilege gives us the ability to deflect bullets. That would be sweet though.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

The Santiago case is not sensational because their guilt over the horrific and senseless killing is undeniable. They were convicted. There's no whodunit mystery for Nancy Grace to insinuate about. She prefers cases where the perp is a family member - best for moral outrage. She is a hack.

I don't think white privilege gives us the ability to deflect bullets. That would be sweet though.

There's nothing that can replace that child, justice is cold comfort to his family. The discussion that needs to take place, on a national scale, is why so many inner city youths (a staggering percentage of them black) are out of control. Why has violence and criminality taking over large cross sections of the African American culture? Even to the point where blacks are scared to walk through predominantly black communities.

"It's economic!"

Yes, to a degree, but the exceptionally poor hillbillies in Appalachia (perennially classified as the poorest of Americans), of which I've come to know well, aren't as wantonly violent. While there are instances of stupid behavior, usually involving shotguns and late night consumption of alcohol, walking through the worst of trailer parks is safe for people of all skin colors (provided you don't mind being handed Jack Chick tracts and can watch where you step). I was an Hispanic kid in the most rural section of the USA, yet was never afraid to go anywhere, until I first visited Atlanta by myself at 17. Incidentally, that was the first time I'd ever had someone earnestly threaten to kill me (or it seemed that way at the time).

I was visiting a girl I'd met at a regional Scholar's Bowl event, she was black (very pretty), but when I arrived at the apartments where she and her mother lived I was ~30 minutes too late, and a large black gentleman (~6' 3" and at least 300lbs) at the entrance to the parking lot told me whites couldn't come in after dark (???). I was pretty naive so I asked why, he told me "because some n**** will drag you out your car and kill you, and we don't need that shit". I was startled, but had to ask why, I wasn't there to cause trouble, I was there to visit Felicia because she'd invited me. He reached into the car, grabbed me by the front of my shirt, and told me, "Go somewhere else to get some ass, or I'll f*cking kill you right here". He appeared to be earnest, even ended up pulling out a lot of my chest hair, so I took what he said to heart, thanked him, and got the hell out of Dodge.

I drove until I found a well-lit payphone that worked (took a while) and called Felicia. She was really worried because I was so late and thought something had happened to me (really?). So her mother and her came down to the bookstore where I was sitting and "escorted" me to their apartment complex, her mom (very nice lady) in their car and she with me. What happened next I'll never forget, the same black guy stopped my car, I guess he was going to make good on his threat because he was carrying an aluminum ball bat, but the girl (all of 5' 2" and 110lbs) got out of the car, walked up to him and pushed him, hard. Then said, "Tyrone, you leave him alone or I'll stick that up your ass and turn you into the world's biggest corn dog", and well, he looked at me, spit, then went back to sit in his lawn chair. She got back in and I said, "that's the bravest thing I've ever seen". She laughed, "Tyrone? He's harmless, his brother Marcus is the one you have to watch out for". So I did, the whole time I was there, but as long as she was with me no one even so much as spoke to me, except her mother and her. Unfortunately, as much as I enjoyed her company, I never went back to visit.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

There's nothing that can replace that child, justice is cold comfort to his family.

It's about deterrence. That's the reason the Trayvon Martin story blew up, because they weren't even going to get that deterrence. There was no way to replace the dead child in that case either, and no one was asking for it. All they wanted was what you so casually dismiss as "cold comfort." You know what's even colder comfort than justice? No justice.

Some would argue that the deterrence is working. Murder rates in the US are dropping steadily.

Why has violence and criminality taking over large cross sections of the African American culture?

Is it rising? I can only find data indicating it is falling. Example:

Ex-Army - Libertarian Nationalist: Bureau of Justice Homicide Statistics by Race

I was visiting a girl...
... I never went back to visit.

Ok so you had a bad experience that caused you to carry a long-lasting prejudice against the entire race of the person who wronged you (natch, since he was the one who made it racial). Maybe he had a bad experience of his own with a white racist and he's carrying that prejudice just as strongly as you are.

[OAW]

Originally Posted by Shaddim

Why has violence and criminality taking over large cross sections of the African American culture?

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

Is it rising? I can only find data indicating it is falling. Example:

Ex-Army - Libertarian Nationalist: Bureau of Justice Homicide Statistics by Race

Shaddim is correct. It's not entirely economic. Uncle Skeleton is also correct. Media hype notwithstanding, violent crime has been steadily decreasing since the 1990s. Even in high profile cases like Chicago. The question is why? It may just be that a lot of it is environmental. There's an interesting theory that makes the case that the violent crime rate is strongly correlated to lead exposure:





America's Real Criminal Element: Lead | Mother Jones

Lead and Crime: How It Connects to Race | Mother Jones

Lead and Crime: Is Correlation Also Causation? | Mother Jones

Lead and Crime: A Linkfest | Mother Jones

OAW

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by OAW 

Shaddim is correct. It's not entirely economic. Uncle Skeleton is also correct. Media hype notwithstanding, violent crime has been steadily decreasing since the 1990s.

Nice, I love the king solomon game.

Lead and Crime: How It Connects to Race | Mother Jones

Doesn't that just boil down to economics again? Blacks couldn't afford unleaded plumbing and they are still experiencing the repercussions of that?

lead

A game I don't really like is don't look for zebras, but it is true nonetheless. I think a simpler non-economic and perfectly plausible contributor is plain old racial profiling. It's a cycle, blacks commit more crimes, so crime fighters target blacks, which results in many blacks being unfairly targeted, causing them to lose opportunities and develop a (arguably justified) persecution complex and live down to society's expectations of them. Poor whites don't suffer from this (did the article explain why poor whites have been immune from lead poisoning? I admit I only skimmed it; it has the same bold-the-important-parts that OAW posts consistently have )?

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

It's about deterrence. That's the reason the Trayvon Martin story blew up, because they weren't even going to get that deterrence. There was no way to replace the dead child in that case either, and no one was asking for it. All they wanted was what you so casually dismiss as "cold comfort." You know what's even colder comfort than justice? No justice.

Some would argue that the deterrence is working. Murder rates in the US are dropping steadily.

What deterrence? Our legal system doesn't provide rehabilitation or deterrence, it provides avoidance.

Homicides aren't the only types of crime and violence, but the fact they're dropping is in large part due to responsible people owning more guns.

Ok so you had a bad experience that caused you to carry a long-lasting prejudice against the entire race of the person who wronged you (natch, since he was the one who made it racial). Maybe he had a bad experience of his own with a white racist and he's carrying that prejudice just as strongly as you are.

Yes, and then 4 years later I married a black woman due to my hatred of the entire black race, and my PA is black (I was called a reverse-racist on here because I chose her over an equally qualified white guy because I decided she needed more of a helping hand in getting employment, and I was right). Let's all play jump to conclusions, it's fun for the entire family! I'm saying there are internal issues in the black community that are unique to them (much like any race). Specifically, there's violence, anger, and fear that reveals itself in ways that scares everyone, even themselves. There are flat-out broken areas of their social structure that aren't being effectively addressed, and blaming external sources has become the reaction du jour.

[OAW]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

Doesn't that just boil down to economics again?

Indeed. But it explains the difference between poor people in sparsely populated rural areas vs. poor people in densely populated urban centers. The lead exposure in the latter scenario was vastly greater than the former.

OAW

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by OAW 

Indeed. But it explains the difference between poor people in sparsely populated rural areas vs. poor people in densely populated urban centers. The lead exposure in the latter scenario was vastly greater than the former.

OAW

People (and most mammals in general) in densely packed areas suffer from higher levels of depression and anxiety, compound that with economic issues, and other environmental/social concerns, and you have a toxic brew. Blacks need to move out into the country and get some fresh air, figuratively and literally.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

Doesn't free bikes count?

Yes and no. If you're trying to steal one, I suppose, but then it's already too late to complain about profiling because you're a thief who needs to be profiled.

[subego]

Okay. I'm back

I want to narrow the mental health discussion a bit.

There are a whole set of mental disorders you can get which boil down to poor thought processes. There's no chemical imbalance going on. You're not being abused. There hasn't been some huge tragedy you're trying to cope with. When I say racism-minus is like a mental illness, it's like that kind of mental illness.

The two big illnesses which fall into this category are anxiety and depression. It's possible, and actually quite common, for someone to manufacture these conditions out of whole cloth merely by using a few bad premises in their though process. That's one of the reasons CBT can be effective despite its simplicity. The underlying cause of thought process based conditions isn't particularly complicated or varied. It always boils down to, well... a poor thought process.

I posit racism-minus is just that. A poor thought process. Since the goal of CBT is to correct poor thought processes, I see it as an applicable treatment/solution/movement/whateves.

I also posit people who are racist-minus for the most part don't realize it. That's the message I take from the video. I believe most of the people in the video would honestly answer they thought both types of racism are objectively bad, yet they display objectively bad behavior. It's doubtful they want to behave badly. This relates to your question about mental illness hurting yourself vs. hurting others. You get into this Heisenbergian thing where if they knew they were racist-minus, it would hurt them, presuming the knowledge they were a racist-minus was cause for disstress. I'm not sure if lack of distress due to lack of awareness disqualifies it from being an illness. I'm not even sure if it really disqualifies it from being a disorder, even though a key component qualifying as a disorder is it causing one distress. For example, I'm obsessive, but it's not ultimately a disorder for me because it's a net positive in my case.

The reason I would make such a paradoxical statement is because of what I call the Psychiatric Asshole Clause. If disorders were based solely on the behavior causing yourself distress, narcissism couldn't be a disorder. There's actually some creepy similarities between the symptoms of narcissism and racism, the only difference being one is you compared to everybody, while the other is you compared to a smaller group. Likewise, at the upper end of the scale (we'll call it narcissism-plus) you don't care you're an asshole, just like a racist-plus. At the lower end of the scale, with narcissism-minus, you have people who would be horrified if they really knew how much of an asshole people thought they were. Just like racism-minus. You can have either condition (or both) and not know it.

I want to spin-off on the methods you would use to overcome this lack of awareness, and then actually how to apply CBT to racism-minus, but I wanted to see if this all made sense to you first.

I'm such a tease, ain't I?

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by subego 

...but I wanted to see if this all made sense to you first.

It depends, let's see

There are a whole set of mental disorders ... When I say racism-minus is like a mental illness, it's like that kind of mental illness.

For this to be analogous, then either (A) the mental disorders don't negatively affect the patient, or (B) the racist-minus is the kind that has already accepted that any type of racism, once identified, will be consciously quashed; all it takes is to identify it. Right?

The two big illnesses which fall into this category are anxiety and depression.

Then I guess we can rule out (A) above, so it must be (B).

I also posit people who are racist-minus for the most part don't realize it.

Leaning stronger towards (B) now

If disorders were based solely on the behavior causing yourself distress, narcissism couldn't be a disorder. There's actually some creepy similarities between the symptoms of narcissism and racism, the only difference being one is you compared to everybody, while the other is you compared to a smaller group.

Now we're talking

Likewise, at the upper end of the scale (we'll call it narcissism-plus) you don't care you're an asshole, just like a racist-plus.

Just so we're clear, this group is hopeless, right? No therapy (or political correctness) can be expected to "work" with them, we can merely hope to contain the damage.

At the lower end of the scale, with narcissism-minus, you have people who would be horrified if they really knew how much of an asshole people thought they were. Just like racism-minus.

Just like my point (B) again.

...methods...

I read somewhere, forget where, that the biggest methodological challenge in using CBT on narcism is the initial step of getting the patient to accept and recognize that they're doing it, and which behaviors are part of it (just like in this example with racism). The thing about my point (B) is that PCness neatly takes care of those problems. (B) says that no convincing needs to be done; the patient has pre-accepted that anything under the umbrella will be addressed. All they need is a quick reference for what's under the umbrella. There's no quick reference if we're talking about narcissism, so the only option is getting a therapist to tell them what they're doing that qualifies. But with racism, there is a quick reference, it's called political correctness, and if we just add the rarely seen edge cases (like the OP's video) to that reference, then anyone who is subject to your description would be automatically fixed. People who can't be fixed this way, those people aren't what this post is talking about in the first place. IMO.

That's my case for why PC works as well or better than CBT. But I'm not saying I didn't overlook anything. In what ways does CBT beat PCness for curing racism?

I want to spin-off on the methods you would use to overcome this lack of awareness, and then actually how to apply CBT to racism-minus, but I wanted to see if this all made sense to you first.

I'm such a tease, ain't I?

I'm looking forward to it. I guess I can't get the next chapter without replying first can I?

Just to lay my cards on the table, I have been using a secret null hypothesis against which to test yours. To put it bluntly, to a man with a hammer everything looks like a nail. You had a good experience with CBT, and it's natural for you to expect that level of success in using the same tool on different applications. I'm not convinced that this is one of them.

[subego]

Sorry for the tease. I was concerned if I didn't have a tighter lock on where you were coming from, this would get tangled up. Even now I think there are some basic ideas I have failed to communicate, but I think I have a good notion of what they are.

I won't make you wait any longer though. Let's get right into it.

As I mentioned, one of the fundamental theories of CBT is a stimulus causes an automatic thought. To give a quick refresher example, I'd free-associate something with that show where I overloaded the circuit, which caused the automatic thought that I suck.

My main thesis here is racist-minus white people have negative automatic thoughts when they see a black person.

This relates to something OAW said in the OP which I think is very important. I'll alter it a little to apply directly to our current discussion: racist-minus white people see other white people as individuals, and black people as part of a group. As I mentioned earlier, I think there are some basic biological factors involved in that, all pertaining to how the brain deals with the constant crush of stimuli.

I can only speak for myself here, but I'd be shocked if it didn't apply to most white people. When I see a white person, I don't have an obvious automatic thought based on their whiteness. My first automatic thoughts are based on other factors: gender, size, age, manner of dress, etc.

IMO, this is where the biology comes in. As most of my interactions are with white people, "whiteness" isn't a granular enough category for my brain to make use of. Remember, I'm not talking about when you use your brain for deep thought, I'm talking about walking down the street and within the span of less than a second have sized-up dozens of people. That only works with a shortcut.

If only 10% of those people walking down the street are black, the shortcut your brain is going to take is to make that a "group", and carve up the remaining 90% with more granular groupings. It's not going to go back and carve up the 10% group into smaller groupings because you need to be racially sensitive, your brain is trying to keep giant-sized carnivorous predators off your ass.

This is the thing which confuses me the most about your position. I get the feeling you consider what is shown in the video to be an "edge case". The situation may be an edge case, but I don't think the behavior is an edge case. The people in the video aren't just racist-minus here. They're always that way, and have no realization of that.

I posit the white people in the video, when they see a black person, have automatic thoughts based on them being black. Seeing the video, I decided to analyze what my automatic thoughts were when I encounter black people.

The answer is they make me uncomfortable, and I wouldn't be surprised the people in the video would answer the same way, but...

This is where I haul-off on PC. That is a hugely un-PC admission to make. I bet you every person would try to squirm out of that admission. It made me squirm, and I had to put not an insignificant amount of thought into if I wanted to deal with the potential blowback from admitting it. This is what I mean by internalization. PC has (IMO) made it unacceptable to discuss how one feels around black people. When you have tons of people who feel uncomfortable, or whatever they're feeling in that video, I see that they've been conditioned to keep quiet about it as a horrible state of affairs.

This directly connects to the non-trivial issue of how do you point this out* to someone who isn't aware of it? How much luck are we going to have with that if our cultural standard is to frighten people away from discussion?


Couple closing "quick-hits".

We agree the plus kind is hopeless.

I think the "I have a hammer, so everything is a nail" is totally possible.

For me, once I realized I was having the automatic thought of discomfort around black people, the "CBT way" would be to look objectively at what's causing it. In short form, my analysis was I felt black people were angry at me. I'd say that's split evenly between white guilt and thinking I'd be angry at me if I were them. Once you know what's causing the thought, you don't immediately reject it, you look at the evidence, and draw a conclusion from that. Whatever good reasons I might have to think black people are angry at me, I have never been aware of a black person being mad at me**. If that's not enough evidence to convince me my thought process is based in ridiculous shit, I'm pretty hopeless.


*I tossed this past my shrink, and this was his first comment, so your thinking on this is now Doctor approved.

**I'm discounting when I was in high school or earlier, my ex-girlfriend, and the clearly mentally ill.

[OAW]

^^^^



OAW

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by subego

I posit the white people in the video, when they see a black person, have automatic thoughts based on them being black. Seeing the video, I decided to analyze what my automatic thoughts were when I encounter black people.

The answer is they make me uncomfortable, and I wouldn't be surprised the people in the video would answer the same way, but...

Let me say for what it's worth to you that your honesty was absolutely refreshing and took a lot of courage!

You've also put a great deal of thought into this so please don't think I'm psycho-analyzing you at this point in your life, but I wonder if maybe your above point would've made more sense in reverse; that you didn't really need to analyze your feelings because they were automatic and from this posited the white people in the video also had automatic thoughts/discomfort. This is sort of what I posted to OAW earlier ~ innate.

But when the message stops at "whites have automatically-negative thoughts about black people..."; it leaves way too much on the table and paints whites as somehow uniquely prone to racial malice from profiling to murder. i.e. a classic projection. We tell our kids such confusing things... don't judge and then when they don't, we indict them for lacking judgment. Let an older black man walking his near, exclusively-black neighborhood, encounter a white kid trying to break a bicycle free from a pole... something's amiss. These are instincts and it's not necessary to numb them. To your point, what's most sad is that your testimonial would require any courage at all. It's innate. Would you be equally uncomfortable with a black kid in a colorful polo and plaid shorts, or a black man in a police uniform, UPS uniform, or wearing a hard hat and fluorescent vest, three-piece suit, casual-professional with sensible shoes? Of course not. Just as I would feel more comfortable around white people displaying more predictable stimulus. For all the clinical reasons you articulated so well in your post. *full disclosure: I don't sense an automatic discomfort from black stimuli, but then I lived in a predominantly black neighborhood for over a decade and may have simply become more dependent upon factors other than skin color to remain aware as all human beings are inclined to do - your stimuli may vary. Not only is it unfair for PC to shame you for your survival instinct, it's wholly unproductive to alienate conscientious white people (like YOU!) that always have and always will be willing to help any way we can, by casting them in the shadows of their lowest common denominator. In a sense, we pink-toes are conditioned to perpetuate defeatist messages that decry factors ultimately beyond anyone's control. (to dovetail off Uncle's point)

This is where I haul-off on PC. That is a hugely un-PC admission to make. I bet you every person would try to squirm out of that admission. It made me squirm, and I had to put not an insignificant amount of thought into if I wanted to deal with the potential blowback from admitting it. This is what I mean by internalization. PC has (IMO) made it unacceptable to discuss how one feels around black people. When you have tons of people who feel uncomfortable, or whatever they're feeling in that video, I see that they've been conditioned to keep quiet about it as a horrible state of affairs.

Let 'em have it! Here's the thing, most of us act right and don't forget, the intent of the video was to imply thievery, and the experiment was to test how people would respond to the stimuli of black kid vs white kid, but the ones whose spider senses were peaked were ultimately correct. After all, the kid was trying to take a bicycle that didn't belong to him. Likewise, the ones seemingly indifferent may have been merely avoiding confrontation for any number of reasons up to and including a sort of racism (+/-). There were so many details missing in the exposé, I have no clue how it's supposed to be productive at all for truly exploring the injustices to the black community, but if nothing more than stimulating our healthy introspect -- I suppose I'll have to accept that.

[Shaddim]

People in clothes that fit well don't bother me a bit, but the whole baggy clothes hanging past their asses, sideways caps, and lots of fake bling sort of stuff makes me watch them closely, regardless of color.

Oh, and that video, it may not have been mentioned, but the white guy was considerably larger and appeared to have a better understanding of how to use the tools he had, so that affects people as well.

[Chongo]

ABC did segment on 20/20 where the same woman was "stranded" on the side of the road. I don't remember if the same car was used. She was dressed in business attire, and as a hippie. Several people stopped when she was in business attire, almost no one when dressed as a hippie.

[subego]

@ebuddy.

I agree 100% the methodology in the video is terminally flawed. I'm pretty sure I said it earlier, but it bears repeating: don't expect TV producers to run a rigorous sociology experiment.

That said, I also 100% buy the result, and the phenomenon isn't limited to race. It's so common, and impacts so many unrelated situations, I think it can only be described with the term you used: innate.

I'm trying to work that up into something better, but I didn't want my ruminations to come off as ignoring you. Excellent post!

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by subego 

Seeing the video, I decided to analyze what my automatic thoughts were when I encounter black people.

The answer is they make me uncomfortable, and I wouldn't be surprised the people in the video would answer the same way
...
For me, once I realized I was having the automatic thought of discomfort around black people, the "CBT way" would be to look objectively at what's causing it. In short form, my analysis was I felt black people were angry at me.

And what's the "CBT way" result? If it's only as good a result as PC, then you'll have to be prompted to invoke it for every new scenario. If it's better than PC, then your self-analysis after watching this video would carry over to a novel scenario that you had never considered before (ie it "cured" you to some degree; where you would otherwise require additional "treatment," now you don't). Has it ever gotten that far?

I see that they've been conditioned to keep quiet about it as a horrible state of affairs.

Let's not forget that horrible is a relative term, and there's an even more horrible state of affairs that the current state was designed to patch (and it worked; that previous state is a fading memory).

This directly connects to the non-trivial issue of how do you point this out* to someone who isn't aware of it? How much luck are we going to have with that if our cultural standard is to frighten people away from discussion?

*I tossed this past my shrink, and this was his first comment, so your thinking on this is now Doctor approved.

I'm a little confused about what you're saying here. First, is this the "treatment" vs "cure" thing I mentioned above? And second, is it solved, or just agreed that it's a challenge?