Does anyone in the media know what the word 'racist' means?

[Metaphor]

Hamad is at it again, proffering her criticisms of a woman who defended a Muslim couple from a vituperative attack from another woman.

Hamad, from the headline onwards, calls the attack racist. But the Muslim couple weren't attacked because of their perceived race (I don't even know what it is), but because they were perceived to be (and are), Muslims. She goes on in this incoherent mess, talking about the gall of white women speaking for Muslim women:

No matter how well meaning, a white person authoritatively stating what drives any particular woman to observe hijab can come across as incredibly patronising. The moment we claim to know what goes on in another person's head is the moment we go from supporting them to silencing them, and that is something that happens to Muslims, especially women, far too often already.

Why does Hamad use the identifier 'white'? Would it be any less patronising for a non-Muslim person of color to speak authoritatively for a Muslim woman? What if the white person herself were a Muslim? (I hate to break it to Hamad, but there are white people of all colours who are also Muslims).

Is it that Hamad thinks the term 'Islamophobe' doesn't have enough cultural currency and instead wants the short-hand of the more demonising 'racist' label, or does she really think Islam is a race? Are Christians a race?

 

[Eldarion Lathria]

It means 'bad'. They speak of racist traffic, or a spell of racist weather, or having a racist egg at breakfast.

Eldarion Lathria

 

[fast]

It means 'bad'. They speak of racist traffic, or a spell of racist weather, or having a racist egg at breakfast.

Eldarion Lathria

Lol. Give it time and it just might.

 

[bigfield]

Ruby Hamad's writings are the low-hanging fruit on the tree of stupid shit feminists say.

Like, tumblr stupid.

She really doesn't warrant a thread every couple of months.

 

[Metaphor]

Ruby Hamad's writings are the low-hanging fruit on the tree of stupid shit feminists say.

Like, tumblr stupid.

She really doesn't warrant a thread every couple of months.

If people quoting people saying stupid shit were banned as opening threads in PD, half the forum would disappear.

And while I agree with you that she doesn't deserve to be taken seriously, someone's listening, as you don't pay someone six figures to write incoherent nonsense that people don't read. You pay them six figures to write incoherent nonsense that people do read.

But my OP was about more than Hamad. Islam-as-a-pseudo-race is ubiquitous in the media; Hamad merely provided a perfect example.

 

[bigfield]

The rationale is fairly simple: Islamophobia is like racism in it effects, therefore Islamophobia can be called racism.

It's quite obviously incorrect, but there you have it. Hamad is just one more progressive journalist following the herd on this particular abuse of language.

If writers think that there is a racial element to this xenophobia, then they should state as such, eg. "Islamophobic and racist" abuse.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

The meaning of the word "racism" does seem to have been expanding so that it's kind of becoming a synonym for bigotry in general, as opposed to simply for the subset of racially specific bigotry. I don't know if it's so much of an abuse of language as it is an evolution of it. I've heard it used in the context of people being racist against women or old people or specific countries.

You can literally just use them interchangably without any loss of meaning, so it's a moot and pedantic point.

 

[bigfield]

Dude, seriously, that's racist.

 

[TSwizzle]

The meaning of the word "racism" does seem to have been expanding so that it's kind of becoming a synonym for bigotry in general, as opposed to simply for the subset of racially specific bigotry. I don't know if it's so much of an abuse of language as it is an evolution of it. I've heard it used in the context of people being racist against women or old people or specific countries.

You can literally just use them interchangably without any loss of meaning, so it's a moot and pedantic point.

No you can't and no it's not.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

The meaning of the word "racism" does seem to have been expanding so that it's kind of becoming a synonym for bigotry in general, as opposed to simply for the subset of racially specific bigotry. I don't know if it's so much of an abuse of language as it is an evolution of it. I've heard it used in the context of people being racist against women or old people or specific countries.

You can literally just use them interchangably without any loss of meaning, so it's a moot and pedantic point.

No you can't and no it's not.

OK, explain the loss of meaning.

Someone says to you "That guy is racist against women". Do you take his meaning to be:

A) "That guy is bigotted against women"
B) Anything else at all

If your answer is B, you're going to need to explain how you got that, because I don't see any way to not hear the meaning as A.

 

[TSwizzle]

No you can't and no it's not.

OK, explain the loss of meaning.

Someone says to you "That guy is racist against women". Do you take his meaning to be:

A) "That guy is bigotted against women"
B) Anything else at all

If your answer is B, you're going to need to explain how you got that, because I don't see any way to not hear the meaning as A.

Get your hearing checked.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

OK, explain the loss of meaning.

Someone says to you "That guy is racist against women". Do you take his meaning to be:

A) "That guy is bigotted against women"
B) Anything else at all

If your answer is B, you're going to need to explain how you got that, because I don't see any way to not hear the meaning as A.

Get your hearing checked.

So, you admit that there's absolutely no loss of meaning.

 

[SimpleDon]

The problem isn't so much with the imprecise use of the word "racism" but with the always imprecise meaning of the word "race" when used to classify humans. It has never been defined exactly what constitutes different race of humans. There is no scientific basis for the concept of race.

As the word "race" is widely used it is a social construct loosely based on physical appearance with considerable variation in its application from person to person who uses the word and even differences in how a single person uses the word from time to time.

It is without question that however the word is defined that the concept has resulted in artificial social categorizations used primarily to discriminate against those in the categories. There is no other obvious reason for it.

It is not therefore surprising that the word "racism" is misused. The best way to avoid the misuse of the word is to stop using the entire concept of race. The sooner the better.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

The problem isn't so much with the imprecise use of the word "racism" but with the always imprecise meaning of the word "race" when used to classify humans. It has never been defined exactly what constitutes different race of humans. There is no scientific basis for the concept of race.

As the word "race" is widely used it is a social construct loosely based on physical appearance with considerable variation in its application from person to person who uses the word and even differences in how a single person uses the word from time to time.

It is without question that however the word is defined that the concept has resulted in artificial social categorizations used primarily to discriminate against those in the categories. There is no other obvious reason for it.

It is not therefore surprising that the word "racism" is misused. The best way to avoid the misuse of the word is to stop using the entire concept of race. The sooner the better.

I'm white. If we stop using the concept of race, I'll need to get my lazy ass up off of the couch and actually go about working to achieve something with my life in order to assert that I'm superior to everyone else.

That's pretty much a nonstarter. What else have you got?

 

[TSwizzle]

Get your hearing checked.

So, you admit that there's absolutely no loss of meaning.

I admit nothing of the sort. Carry on.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

So, you admit that there's absolutely no loss of meaning.

I admit nothing of the sort. Carry on.

So what do you think someone means when they say that? Your lack of response about it is coming across as a very compelling answer that you understand it as perfectly as everyone else would.

 

[TSwizzle]

I admit nothing of the sort. Carry on.

So what do you think someone means when they say that? Your lack of response about it is coming across as a very compelling answer that you understand it as perfectly as everyone else would.

Those Manchester Utd supporters, what a bunch of cunts they are. Is that racist ?

 

[Derec]

No you can't and no it's not.

OK, explain the loss of meaning.

Someone says to you "That guy is racist against women". Do you take his meaning to be:

A) "That guy is bigotted against women"
B) Anything else at all

If your answer is B, you're going to need to explain how you got that, because I don't see any way to not hear the meaning as A.

C) The speaker is an idiot and she probably writes for feministing.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

So what do you think someone means when they say that? Your lack of response about it is coming across as a very compelling answer that you understand it as perfectly as everyone else would.

Those Manchester Utd supporters, what a bunch of cunts they are. Is that racist ?

It's bigotted. If you describe it as racist, there are zero people who don't understand what you mean.

 

[SimpleDon]

The problem isn't so much with the imprecise use of the word "racism" but with the always imprecise meaning of the word "race" when used to classify humans. It has never been defined exactly what constitutes different race of humans. There is no scientific basis for the concept of race.

As the word "race" is widely used it is a social construct loosely based on physical appearance with considerable variation in its application from person to person who uses the word and even differences in how a single person uses the word from time to time.

It is without question that however the word is defined that the concept has resulted in artificial social categorizations used primarily to discriminate against those in the categories. There is no other obvious reason for it.

It is not therefore surprising that the word "racism" is misused. The best way to avoid the misuse of the word is to stop using the entire concept of race. The sooner the better.

I'm white. If we stop using the concept of race, I'll need to get my lazy ass up off of the couch and actually go about working to achieve something with my life in order to assert that I'm superior to everyone else.

That's pretty much a nonstarter. What else have you got?

Sorry, this is pretty much the extent of my wisdom on the subject, the profound observation that there is no racism without the idea of race. And this poor pearl made my brain hurt. Probably unnecessarily I can tell you that I also am *hite (I refuse to take sides in the Great Race Capitalization Controversy) and haven't yet suffered for my short comings.