5 ms·

>We are at the stage, that merely acknowledging someone's sex or race will earn you these labels. That in itself is too broad a generalization though, because

>We are at the stage, that merely acknowledging someone's sex or race will earn you these labels. That in itself is too broad a generalization though, because there are many times when mentioning someone's race/sex is, due to context, subtly racist/sexist. Generally, if you mention someones race or sex and that information is not actually relevant in any way to what you're saying, you are helping to perpetuate stereotypes and prejudice. It doesn't matter that doing so feels normal to you; shouting slurs at minorities feels normal to neo-Nazi[1] skinheads too. The hard part about prejudice is that it isn't simply solved by honest people acting naturally. It's solved by honest people trying really hard not to be prejudiced, because prejudice is innate. [1] ed: thanks for pointing this out, peterwwillis

peterwwillis 14y ago
Wow. The irony of discussing prejudice and in the same breath calling skinheads racists. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skinhead http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skinhead Please, please, please, read that page. Not only to save yourself and others the ignorance of believing skinheads are racists, but also because there's a culture and a people that will be forever denigrated because the media and parroting readers will continue to perpetuate this stereotype.
- mistercow 14y ago
  My apologies. I should have specified "neo-Nazi skinheads". This is not in the same category as racial or gender prejudice, however. It is simply a matter of mislabeling.
  - peterwwillis 14y ago
    No apology necessary. It's just incredibly frustrating that the label has been taken to such an extreme to the point that a whole subculture is guilty by association. It's definitely not the same thing as racial or gender prejudice, but it can be just as damaging to the people who live under the label and deal with its unintended consequences (like getting beaten outside a club for shaving your head and wearing doc martens). We Hackers are lucky that we live in a world where geeks are now the popular cool kids and we can take back a word that used to get us expelled.
    - slurgfest 14y ago
      Except in this case you are talking about a subculture which is preoccupied with gratuitous violence (even outside the context of racism). That makes it not very comparable to race, gender or geeks. Beating people is obviously not nice. But if you get beaten outside a club for intentionally dressing the same way as a subculture which is historically well-known for beating up people outside clubs for fun (or being a foreigner, or being gay, or being a hippie, or being Republican...) then that might be unfair, but it isn't at all surprising. And it doesn't even hold a candle to being attacked for things over which you have no control, like being a foreigner. It's not even related. The comparison of this to racism and sexism is a ridiculous excess of political correctness on behalf of people who don't need it. Just stop. Nobody has an obligation to preserve the delicate feelings of skinheads from the consequences of the skinhead cultural obsession with violence.
      - peterwwillis 14y ago
        I find it hard to agree with your point. Not because of your suggestion that there's a cultural obsession with violence, but because you seem to think it's fine that these people get stereotyped, because their supposed violent culture deserves it, or something. Wrong is wrong, and stereotype is wrong. On your comment about a 'cultural obsession with violence': Perhaps that's your personal experience. It's not been mine. I have met many kinds of skinheads, from extremists and gangs to kids who just liked to hang out listening to reggae. I'm pretty sure you'll find lots of different cultures that have widely ranging attitudes. I can tell you that skinheads are probably more likely than most people to jump in and defend someone, sometimes with violence. But they're also some of the nicest people i've known. I tend to find all kinds of working-class people act this way, regardless of subculture. I can also tell you that at most punk or hardcore shows i've been to, if there's one or two kids standing in the middle of the pit randomly attacking people, it's usually some form of a skinhead. It's an embarrassment that most people in the subculture don't agree with at all. It is however a great opportunity to meet violence with violence, and show the individual that their actions are not welcome.
- Johngibb 14y ago
  Off topic, but I find it puzzling that there's basically a handbook for a subculture trying to be different. It seems like a logical impossibility for a subculture to actually be unique and different, when there's essentially a dress code (short hair, levis, dr martens). I'm not trying to make any value judgements on the subculture, just trying to understand. Maybe the point is that the subculture / group itself is unique, and I'm mistaking that for individual uniqueness / individuality?
  - freehunter 14y ago
    The way I always take it when I hear someone say they're their own person and they reject society is that they're merely choosing another culture to fit into. Counter-culture is not the lack of a culture, but rather the rejection of mainstream culture and instead choosing to fit in with a different group. Emo/scene, goth, skinhead, hipster, whatever group they're a part of, it's true that they are being an individual and being counter-culture if you take the language liberally to mean they're simply making a choice to associate with another culture. Even if it's just a phase or a fad, but those people are not similar to the rest of society. Every society has a dress code; by not being a part of the majority, they are in fact "unique" in the meaning of "not typical; unusual". Language is fun! http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/unique http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/unique
  - peterwwillis 14y ago
    Skinhead culture is about embracing things you do like, not rejecting the things you don't. They're not trying to be different. They just like the music and the clothes and the attitude, as well as the extended family nature of the people who identify as they do. I'm pretty sure everyone who associates themselves with any label is doing the same thing.
    - hluska 14y ago
      I wanted to thank you for your comments in defense of skinheads yesterday, but time got away from me (and I have a touch of ADHD). Thanks for jumping up in defense of a group I have a whole lot of respect for!
- alttag 14y ago
  Interesting. The GP's usage is aligned with every instance I've encountered over the past 20-odd years (in the U.S.), while the Wikipedia entry appears to have a European focus and is starkly different from my understanding of U.S.-ian denotation and connotation of the term. See, e.g., Merriam-Webster: "2: a usually white male belonging to any of various sometimes violent youth gangs whose members have close-shaven hair and often espouse white-supremacist beliefs." http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/skinhead http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/skinhead
  - peterwwillis 14y ago
    Go to a concert or local show which has music that skinheads like. Find one, and talk to them. They're pretty nice people generally, though they also may be defensive from getting so much shit for being associated with the white power fuckheads. I've heard the european skinheads are a lot more touchy than the american ones. If they have a patch that says SHARP on it, they are 100% anti-racist, and will probably beat you up if you make a racist joke. A bit violent, yes. But not without reason. Again, not unlike some others (people like Ian MacKaye used to shave their heads and get into fights over stupid personal beliefs and weren't skinheads at all...)
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
freehunter 14y ago
I would argue there's some work that needs to be done on the other side of the coin, too. There are too many people making money off feeling oppressed. I personally don't feel the answer is making honest people go out of their way to carefully word their sentences to avoid mentioning a characteristic of a person, I feel the answer is understanding that saying "that is a person" is nowhere near as descriptive as "a black man from Chicago". And herein lies the difficulty with reconciling language (which is a way to communicate descriptive experiences) with political correctness. Is his race relevant? Is his gender relevant? Is his city relevant? Maybe, maybe not. But the point is to describe the scene as it exists. The mere mention of descriptive words are often taken as prejudice when that's not the intention. Let's flip that back around. When I say "that person from Chicago", who do you picture in your mind? If you picture a man/woman, black/white/latino/asian, tall/short/fat/etc, you're being "prejudiced". Because I never mentioned any description of the person. But without that information, your mental picture of the scene is incomplete and your brain is going to fill in those blanks. Language has words you can add or omit to imply discrimination. "That black man from Chicago." "Another Asian from Chicago". "Of course, he's white." In absence of these deliberate hints, it's asinine to assume anyone is taking any sort of position. When I go camping I don't say "I stayed somewhere with plants", I say "I slept in my tent on the ground in the Yosemite forest." That's not prejudiced against trees just because I called it a forest, nor against the Earth because I mentioned the ground. The more prevalent problem is not people being prejudiced, it's people feeling prejudged just because they expect to be prejudged. Why should someone go out of their way to reword and complicate their story when you're (hypothetical "you") are going out of your way to unword and read more into their story than they actually said? (This isn't in response to the linked story, merely to mistercow's point)
- slurgfest 14y ago
  Nobody is "making money off feeling oppressed".
  - freehunter 14y ago
    There most certainly are people who have become celebrities off fostering the notion that true and abhorrent racism is everywhere. They make the news, they travel to picket, they write for newspapers, and in one case have actually been the subject of a South Park episode about creating racism out of nothing. Likewise, there are religious figures who are making money off going on TV and shouting about how their religious freedoms are being trampled on and how it literally is an "us vs them" fight and if they lose it's game over for their deity. Likewise, there are celebrities who get their paycheck in part or full from finding sexism in daily life. Ryan Singel just became one of them. It's the power these people, few though they may be, hold over the discussions in society, the power to push political correctness and make people second-guess their words and actions to the point where it's impossible to keep up with what is polite to say and what will get you fired, beaten up, or cast out. There's money to be made in controversy, and that money isn't going uncollected.

peterwwillis 14y ago

Wow. The irony of discussing prejudice and in the same breath calling skinheads racists. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skinhead http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skinhead Please, please, please, read that page. Not only to save yourself and others the ignorance of believing skinheads are racists, but also because there's a culture and a people that will be forever denigrated because the media and parroting readers will continue to perpetuate this stereotype.

mistercow 14y ago
My apologies. I should have specified "neo-Nazi skinheads". This is not in the same category as racial or gender prejudice, however. It is simply a matter of mislabeling.
- peterwwillis 14y ago
  No apology necessary. It's just incredibly frustrating that the label has been taken to such an extreme to the point that a whole subculture is guilty by association. It's definitely not the same thing as racial or gender prejudice, but it can be just as damaging to the people who live under the label and deal with its unintended consequences (like getting beaten outside a club for shaving your head and wearing doc martens). We Hackers are lucky that we live in a world where geeks are now the popular cool kids and we can take back a word that used to get us expelled.
  - slurgfest 14y ago
    Except in this case you are talking about a subculture which is preoccupied with gratuitous violence (even outside the context of racism). That makes it not very comparable to race, gender or geeks. Beating people is obviously not nice. But if you get beaten outside a club for intentionally dressing the same way as a subculture which is historically well-known for beating up people outside clubs for fun (or being a foreigner, or being gay, or being a hippie, or being Republican...) then that might be unfair, but it isn't at all surprising. And it doesn't even hold a candle to being attacked for things over which you have no control, like being a foreigner. It's not even related. The comparison of this to racism and sexism is a ridiculous excess of political correctness on behalf of people who don't need it. Just stop. Nobody has an obligation to preserve the delicate feelings of skinheads from the consequences of the skinhead cultural obsession with violence.
    - peterwwillis 14y ago
      I find it hard to agree with your point. Not because of your suggestion that there's a cultural obsession with violence, but because you seem to think it's fine that these people get stereotyped, because their supposed violent culture deserves it, or something. Wrong is wrong, and stereotype is wrong. On your comment about a 'cultural obsession with violence': Perhaps that's your personal experience. It's not been mine. I have met many kinds of skinheads, from extremists and gangs to kids who just liked to hang out listening to reggae. I'm pretty sure you'll find lots of different cultures that have widely ranging attitudes. I can tell you that skinheads are probably more likely than most people to jump in and defend someone, sometimes with violence. But they're also some of the nicest people i've known. I tend to find all kinds of working-class people act this way, regardless of subculture. I can also tell you that at most punk or hardcore shows i've been to, if there's one or two kids standing in the middle of the pit randomly attacking people, it's usually some form of a skinhead. It's an embarrassment that most people in the subculture don't agree with at all. It is however a great opportunity to meet violence with violence, and show the individual that their actions are not welcome.
Johngibb 14y ago
Off topic, but I find it puzzling that there's basically a handbook for a subculture trying to be different. It seems like a logical impossibility for a subculture to actually be unique and different, when there's essentially a dress code (short hair, levis, dr martens). I'm not trying to make any value judgements on the subculture, just trying to understand. Maybe the point is that the subculture / group itself is unique, and I'm mistaking that for individual uniqueness / individuality?
- freehunter 14y ago
  The way I always take it when I hear someone say they're their own person and they reject society is that they're merely choosing another culture to fit into. Counter-culture is not the lack of a culture, but rather the rejection of mainstream culture and instead choosing to fit in with a different group. Emo/scene, goth, skinhead, hipster, whatever group they're a part of, it's true that they are being an individual and being counter-culture if you take the language liberally to mean they're simply making a choice to associate with another culture. Even if it's just a phase or a fad, but those people are not similar to the rest of society. Every society has a dress code; by not being a part of the majority, they are in fact "unique" in the meaning of "not typical; unusual". Language is fun! http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/unique http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/unique
- peterwwillis 14y ago
  Skinhead culture is about embracing things you do like, not rejecting the things you don't. They're not trying to be different. They just like the music and the clothes and the attitude, as well as the extended family nature of the people who identify as they do. I'm pretty sure everyone who associates themselves with any label is doing the same thing.
  - hluska 14y ago
    I wanted to thank you for your comments in defense of skinheads yesterday, but time got away from me (and I have a touch of ADHD). Thanks for jumping up in defense of a group I have a whole lot of respect for!
alttag 14y ago
Interesting. The GP's usage is aligned with every instance I've encountered over the past 20-odd years (in the U.S.), while the Wikipedia entry appears to have a European focus and is starkly different from my understanding of U.S.-ian denotation and connotation of the term. See, e.g., Merriam-Webster: "2: a usually white male belonging to any of various sometimes violent youth gangs whose members have close-shaven hair and often espouse white-supremacist beliefs." http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/skinhead http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/skinhead
- peterwwillis 14y ago
  Go to a concert or local show which has music that skinheads like. Find one, and talk to them. They're pretty nice people generally, though they also may be defensive from getting so much shit for being associated with the white power fuckheads. I've heard the european skinheads are a lot more touchy than the american ones. If they have a patch that says SHARP on it, they are 100% anti-racist, and will probably beat you up if you make a racist joke. A bit violent, yes. But not without reason. Again, not unlike some others (people like Ian MacKaye used to shave their heads and get into fights over stupid personal beliefs and weren't skinheads at all...)
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]

freehunter 14y ago

I would argue there's some work that needs to be done on the other side of the coin, too. There are too many people making money off feeling oppressed. I personally don't feel the answer is making honest people go out of their way to carefully word their sentences to avoid mentioning a characteristic of a person, I feel the answer is understanding that saying "that is a person" is nowhere near as descriptive as "a black man from Chicago". And herein lies the difficulty with reconciling language (which is a way to communicate descriptive experiences) with political correctness. Is his race relevant? Is his gender relevant? Is his city relevant? Maybe, maybe not. But the point is to describe the scene as it exists. The mere mention of descriptive words are often taken as prejudice when that's not the intention. Let's flip that back around. When I say "that person from Chicago", who do you picture in your mind? If you picture a man/woman, black/white/latino/asian, tall/short/fat/etc, you're being "prejudiced". Because I never mentioned any description of the person. But without that information, your mental picture of the scene is incomplete and your brain is going to fill in those blanks. Language has words you can add or omit to imply discrimination. "That black man from Chicago." "Another Asian from Chicago". "Of course, he's white." In absence of these deliberate hints, it's asinine to assume anyone is taking any sort of position. When I go camping I don't say "I stayed somewhere with plants", I say "I slept in my tent on the ground in the Yosemite forest." That's not prejudiced against trees just because I called it a forest, nor against the Earth because I mentioned the ground. The more prevalent problem is not people being prejudiced, it's people feeling prejudged just because they expect to be prejudged. Why should someone go out of their way to reword and complicate their story when you're (hypothetical "you") are going out of your way to unword and read more into their story than they actually said? (This isn't in response to the linked story, merely to mistercow's point)

slurgfest 14y ago
Nobody is "making money off feeling oppressed".
- freehunter 14y ago
  There most certainly are people who have become celebrities off fostering the notion that true and abhorrent racism is everywhere. They make the news, they travel to picket, they write for newspapers, and in one case have actually been the subject of a South Park episode about creating racism out of nothing. Likewise, there are religious figures who are making money off going on TV and shouting about how their religious freedoms are being trampled on and how it literally is an "us vs them" fight and if they lose it's game over for their deity. Likewise, there are celebrities who get their paycheck in part or full from finding sexism in daily life. Ryan Singel just became one of them. It's the power these people, few though they may be, hold over the discussions in society, the power to push political correctness and make people second-guess their words and actions to the point where it's impossible to keep up with what is polite to say and what will get you fired, beaten up, or cast out. There's money to be made in controversy, and that money isn't going uncollected.