Fukudome Angry with Cubs Vendors?

[Jehrico]

More importantly, though, I think perhaps the most important thing one can do to combat racism and prejudice is to denounce it and denounce it vocally. Do some people take it too far? Maybe. Are some people guilty of faux outrage. I'm sure they are. But I'm willing to risk that because I think to ignore instances of prejudice is to come dangerously close to endorsing them.

Not always. Racism is a form of ignorance. Ignorant people tend to seek and bask in the limelight. I think sometimes we put them in the spotlight and they revel in it rather than get embarrassed. Case in point: William Ligue Jr, knew he was going to be arrested and put on national television for rushing Gamboa as he called someone he knew on his cellphone before he did it and told them to watch the TV (granted, that's not racism, but that is ignorance looking for attention, and it doesn't matter that the attention is negative). I think there's a difference between petty ignorant racism that should be ignored so as not to give it the attention it wants, and real racism that helps propagate negative stereotypes that needs to be snuffed out.

 

I was really liked Fukudome's statement on the situation. I thought he made a strong, pointed statement against the t-shirts, but didn't give off a Rosie-ODonnell-esque-national-call-for-outrage-because-no-one-should-ever-be-offended-by-anything type of attitude at all. He hit it with a hammer pretty gracefully, imo.

[ctcf]

I was actually a little put off by the whole bowing thing but damn those are bad.

[Sarcastic]

indefensible.

 

I find this pretty stupid and unfunny, but I can think of things that are worse. I wish people would have a little more respect for other cultures and just not buy them, though.

 

(Not aimed at snoodmonger) Not quite as unfunny as the shirts themselves are all the pompous or downright violent reactions provoked by them. Faux outrage is not awesome. I'm not crazy about real outrage either when it is a reaction to t-shirts.

 

 

Where did I say there was nothing worse? I said it was indefensible. That's not an exaggeration.

 

Want to know what really sucks? (Not aimed at sarcastic) Lame people who think they can ascertain "faux outrage" on a message board. I also don't care for people who are willing to casually brush aside blatantly offensive stuff.

 

As for casually brushing it aside, what would you have me do? If I write out an angry post on an internet message board, am I helping anyone? They aren't hurting anybody, they are just being idiots, so I don't see the point in getting angry. If others want to, they are free to do so.

 

I guess I take issue with this mentality. Your base argument is that it is somehow better to do nothing than to do something. Or, at the least, they are of equal value. I'm not going to sit here and pretend me (or anyone else) condemning racism on a message board is going to effect any great change. But it's certainly not hurting anyone. And it's possible it could help in a small way. For example, let's say someone here hadn't considered the implications of the shirt and was considering buying one. If he stumbled across this thread, maybe he thinks twice.

 

More importantly, though, I think perhaps the most important thing one can do to combat racism and prejudice is to denounce it and denounce it vocally. Do some people take it too far? Maybe. Are some people guilty of faux outrage. I'm sure they are. But I'm willing to risk that because I think to ignore instances of prejudice is to come dangerously close to endorsing them.

 

My base argument is not nothing is better than something, my base argument is something else is better than this. Denouncing every act of racism no matter how insignificant compared to the others makes people angry but doesn't change anything, and ignoring all racism won't make it go away on its own, as some hope. We all know that racism is more than just some celebrity's offensive remarks or slogans on a t-shirt, it is part of how we run our communities, and that's the dangerous racism. To actually accomplish any reduction in the effects of racism you need activism and a change in the way society works, as you see some of after the Civil War and the civil rights movement. Not that you necessarily have to go to the extremes of those time periods to accomplish change on race, but ranting about relatively trivial offenses is definitely not the most important thing you can do to fight racism.

[Guest]

My base argument is not nothing is better than something, my base argument is something else is better than this. Denouncing every act of racism no matter how insignificant compared to the others makes people angry but doesn't change anything, and ignoring all racism won't make it go away on its own, as some hope. We all know that racism is more than just some celebrity's offensive remarks or slogans on a t-shirt, it is part of how we run our communities, and that's the dangerous racism. To actually accomplish any reduction in the effects of racism you need activism and a change in the way society works, as you see some of after the Civil War and the civil rights movement. Not that you necessarily have to go to the extremes of those time periods to accomplish change on race, but ranting about relatively trivial offenses is definitely not the most important thing you can do to fight racism.

Not necessarily. I'm not sure I buy into the theory, but one of the well-publicized econ books lately pushed a story about fighting crime on the trains in NY. They said one of the critical elements in the plan was to eliminate graffiti. The theory was that the presence of the graffiti led to a perception that further abuses would be more easily tolerated. By visibly showing that even something as minor as graffiti wouldn't be tolerated, they created an atmosphere in which many fewer people would push the envelope. Crime did indeed go down, though many other factors could have been at play so it is dangerous to just assume a cause/effect relationship there.

 

The point is that it might be possible to influence the more grievous forms of racism by focusing on the more public, easier to identify, though smaller and less significant forms of it.

[Sarcastic]

My base argument is not nothing is better than something, my base argument is something else is better than this. Denouncing every act of racism no matter how insignificant compared to the others makes people angry but doesn't change anything, and ignoring all racism won't make it go away on its own, as some hope. We all know that racism is more than just some celebrity's offensive remarks or slogans on a t-shirt, it is part of how we run our communities, and that's the dangerous racism. To actually accomplish any reduction in the effects of racism you need activism and a change in the way society works, as you see some of after the Civil War and the civil rights movement. Not that you necessarily have to go to the extremes of those time periods to accomplish change on race, but ranting about relatively trivial offenses is definitely not the most important thing you can do to fight racism.

Not necessarily. I'm not sure I buy into the theory, but one of the well-publicized econ books lately pushed a story about fighting crime on the trains in NY. They said one of the critical elements in the plan was to eliminate graffiti. The theory was that the presence of the graffiti led to a perception that further abuses would be more easily tolerated. By visibly showing that even something as minor as graffiti wouldn't be tolerated, they created an atmosphere in which many fewer people would push the envelope. Crime did indeed go down, though many other factors could have been at play so it is dangerous to just assume a cause/effect relationship there.

 

The point is that it might be possible to influence the more grievous forms of racism by focusing on the more public, easier to identify, though smaller and less significant forms of it.

 

I don't think that crime and race are comparable there. The most damaging kinds of racism we have are not the results of conscious choices, they are the results of people going about their day as they normally do, unaware that some of the insitutions they participate in harm people of certain races. You can't stop racism by making people afraid to be racist, because they often don't believe that they are doing anything wrong in the first place.

[javy knows my name]

 

I disagree. I don't think these ideas are necessarily related at all. The argument that anyone who complains about racism is playing the race card is typically based on satisfying the resentment of some white people and their assumption that race problems have been solved and black people should get over it. This argument is based on no such thing. I'm not saying there isn't some racism going on here, just that this particular instance is kind of a silly thing to be outraged about.

 

i disagree. telling people that they shouldn't be offended by something clearly offensive and based upon an offensive stereotype is tantamount to telling black people that they cannot be victims of racism because it doesn't exist.

 

I'm not even saying people can't be offended by this, just that expressions of outrage aren't useful on this, especially when they aren't genuine. Let's face it, when you are threatening violence against large numbers of people for wearing offensive t-shirts, you are putting on an act or you are imbalanced. Every time something offensive (though not always consequential) happens, people feel a need to take their reaction to extremes to demonstrate how much they are offended. When the story about the Yale art student hit, people wished she would be barren. Everytime some perverted criminal commits a horrendous act, people talk about sending him to jail to be repeatedly anally raped. This acting is not helpful.

 

There is still damaging racism in our society. If you want to combat it, do that instead of making a big deal over an idiotic but ultimately unimportant racist t-shirt.

 

i didn't say anything about people being offended to the point of violence. i didn't know that that was the case.

 

in the case of threats of violence, i'd say those people are much more likely to be unbalanced than faking.

 

you simply cannot tell people that they aren't offended by something.

 

I'm not so much saying that people aren't offended as I am saying that their being offended is partly a result of feeling expected to be offended, and offended in a grand way. Threatening violence is sometimes just a way to up the ante and prove how offended you really are. And sometimes it is just a bad joke.

 

I think people can genuinely be offended by this. It certainly is stupid. But expectations muddy the waters and blow inconsequential issues out of proportion, making it harder to talk reasonably about more consequential unspoken problems. Hence, the outrage over t-shirts not being useful.

 

I don't know, this train of thought has gotten away from me.

 

I'm sorry for the pile-on, but I agree with Sully. There is just no way you should feel qualified to decide this for someone else. And Snood was right, as well. A violent, over-the-top reaction to racism is MUCH better than ignorance of it or even complacency in the face of it.

[Chocolate Milk]

 

I disagree. I don't think these ideas are necessarily related at all. The argument that anyone who complains about racism is playing the race card is typically based on satisfying the resentment of some white people and their assumption that race problems have been solved and black people should get over it. This argument is based on no such thing. I'm not saying there isn't some racism going on here, just that this particular instance is kind of a silly thing to be outraged about.

 

i disagree. telling people that they shouldn't be offended by something clearly offensive and based upon an offensive stereotype is tantamount to telling black people that they cannot be victims of racism because it doesn't exist.

 

I'm not even saying people can't be offended by this, just that expressions of outrage aren't useful on this, especially when they aren't genuine. Let's face it, when you are threatening violence against large numbers of people for wearing offensive t-shirts, you are putting on an act or you are imbalanced. Every time something offensive (though not always consequential) happens, people feel a need to take their reaction to extremes to demonstrate how much they are offended. When the story about the Yale art student hit, people wished she would be barren. Everytime some perverted criminal commits a horrendous act, people talk about sending him to jail to be repeatedly anally raped. This acting is not helpful.

 

There is still damaging racism in our society. If you want to combat it, do that instead of making a big deal over an idiotic but ultimately unimportant racist t-shirt.

 

i didn't say anything about people being offended to the point of violence. i didn't know that that was the case.

 

in the case of threats of violence, i'd say those people are much more likely to be unbalanced than faking.

 

you simply cannot tell people that they aren't offended by something.

 

I'm not so much saying that people aren't offended as I am saying that their being offended is partly a result of feeling expected to be offended, and offended in a grand way. Threatening violence is sometimes just a way to up the ante and prove how offended you really are. And sometimes it is just a bad joke.

 

I think people can genuinely be offended by this. It certainly is stupid. But expectations muddy the waters and blow inconsequential issues out of proportion, making it harder to talk reasonably about more consequential unspoken problems. Hence, the outrage over t-shirts not being useful.

 

I don't know, this train of thought has gotten away from me.

 

I'm sorry for the pile-on, but I agree with Sully. There is just no way you should feel qualified to decide this for someone else. And Snood was right, as well. A violent, over-the-top reaction to racism is MUCH better than ignorance of it or even complacency in the face of it.

I'm in agreement. I don't understand why there needs to be a some kind of line when we are and aren't offended by racism. These shirts were totally out of line and more than just vaguely or slightly racist. Why is this any less signifigant than anything else?

[TakeMeOutToTheBallGame]

How are these shirts racist? A little insensitive? Sure. But Racist? It's not like they have Fukudome flying a plane with bombs falling.

[javy knows my name]

How are these shirts racist? A little insensitive? Sure. But Racist? It's not like they have Fukudome flying a plane with bombs falling.

How are they any less racist than references to Pearl Harbor?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

How are these shirts racist? A little insensitive? Sure. But Racist? It's not like they have Fukudome flying a plane with bombs falling.

How are they any less racist than references to Pearl Harbor?

 

I keep hammering this point, but racism is the belief that some races are inherently superior than others. Neither a plane nor the slanted eyes shirts are racist.

 

They are insensitive, rude, offensive, stereotypical and wrong, but not racist.

[bhogg]

If this kind of crap keeps up, will Kosuke get to a point where he wants out?

[Sarcastic]

I'm sorry for the pile-on, but I agree with Sully. There is just no way you should feel qualified to decide this for someone else. And Snood was right, as well. A violent, over-the-top reaction to racism is MUCH better than ignorance of it or even complacency in the face of it.

I'm in agreement. I don't understand why there needs to be a some kind of line when we are and aren't offended by racism. These shirts were totally out of line and more than just vaguely or slightly racist. Why is this any less signifigant than anything else?

 

1) You both misunderstood my point. I didn't say people couldn't or shouldn't be offended, just that exaggerated outrage in relatively insignificant cases is not useful for the reason I've already stated, which brings me to:

 

2) This is less significant, than, say, voter suppression, because voter suppression limits people's actions because on race, which is unethical. This doesn't take away anyone's freedom of choice, it just bothers us.

 

Making a big deal out of stupid things like this is for many people a way to feel good about your morality on race without confronting larger problems of race, and as a society we have been doing that for too long.

[CubinNY]

I'm sorry for the pile-on, but I agree with Sully. There is just no way you should feel qualified to decide this for someone else. And Snood was right, as well. A violent, over-the-top reaction to racism is MUCH better than ignorance of it or even complacency in the face of it.

I'm in agreement. I don't understand why there needs to be a some kind of line when we are and aren't offended by racism. These shirts were totally out of line and more than just vaguely or slightly racist. Why is this any less signifigant than anything else?

 

1) You both misunderstood my point. I didn't say people couldn't or shouldn't be offended, just that exaggerated outrage in relatively insignificant cases is not useful for the reason I've already stated, which brings me to:

 

2) This is less significant, than, say, voter suppression, because voter suppression limits people's actions because on race, which is unethical. This doesn't take away anyone's freedom of choice, it just bothers us.

 

Making a big deal out of stupid things like this is for many people a way to feel good about your morality on race without confronting larger problems of race, and as a society we have been doing that for too long.

You had me until paragraph three.

 

The problem isn't making a big deal out of "insignificant" stuff. The problem is sort of like the "little boy who cried wolf". People get tired of hearing it, even if "it" happens to be true. Then the Fox News types can say, "oh he's pulling the race card". Although pulling the race card may be true because it needs to be pulled, the outrage for little things gives the idiot/racists cover.

[Sarcastic]

I'm sorry for the pile-on, but I agree with Sully. There is just no way you should feel qualified to decide this for someone else. And Snood was right, as well. A violent, over-the-top reaction to racism is MUCH better than ignorance of it or even complacency in the face of it.

I'm in agreement. I don't understand why there needs to be a some kind of line when we are and aren't offended by racism. These shirts were totally out of line and more than just vaguely or slightly racist. Why is this any less signifigant than anything else?

 

1) You both misunderstood my point. I didn't say people couldn't or shouldn't be offended, just that exaggerated outrage in relatively insignificant cases is not useful for the reason I've already stated, which brings me to:

 

2) This is less significant, than, say, voter suppression, because voter suppression limits people's actions because on race, which is unethical. This doesn't take away anyone's freedom of choice, it just bothers us.

 

Making a big deal out of stupid things like this is for many people a way to feel good about your morality on race without confronting larger problems of race, and as a society we have been doing that for too long.

You had me until paragraph three.

 

The problem isn't making a big deal out of "insignificant" stuff. The problem is sort of like the "little boy who cried wolf". People get tired of hearing it, even if "it" happens to be true. Then the Fox News types can say, "oh he's pulling the race card". Although pulling the race card may be true because it needs to be pulled, the outrage for little things gives the idiot/racists cover.

 

Right. I think we both mean more or less the same thing, that this sort of stuff gives cover to people who don't want to deal with larger issues.

[javy knows my name]

How are these shirts racist? A little insensitive? Sure. But Racist? It's not like they have Fukudome flying a plane with bombs falling.

How are they any less racist than references to Pearl Harbor?

 

I keep hammering this point, but racism is the belief that some races are inherently superior than others. Neither a plane nor the slanted eyes shirts are racist.

 

They are insensitive, rude, offensive, stereotypical and wrong, but not racist.

And how is making a product that highlights consensus negative stereotypes about a particular race not suggesting that that race is inherently inferior?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

How are these shirts racist? A little insensitive? Sure. But Racist? It's not like they have Fukudome flying a plane with bombs falling.

How are they any less racist than references to Pearl Harbor?

 

I keep hammering this point, but racism is the belief that some races are inherently superior than others. Neither a plane nor the slanted eyes shirts are racist.

 

They are insensitive, rude, offensive, stereotypical and wrong, but not racist.

And how is making a product that highlights consensus negative stereotypes about a particular race not suggesting that that race is inherently inferior?

 

Pronunciation differences are negative?

[CubinNY]

How are these shirts racist? A little insensitive? Sure. But Racist? It's not like they have Fukudome flying a plane with bombs falling.

How are they any less racist than references to Pearl Harbor?

 

I keep hammering this point, but racism is the belief that some races are inherently superior than others. Neither a plane nor the slanted eyes shirts are racist.

 

They are insensitive, rude, offensive, stereotypical and wrong, but not racist.

And how is making a product that highlights consensus negative stereotypes about a particular race not suggesting that that race is inherently inferior?

 

Pronunciation differences are negative?

You answered it in the post above. It doesn't take a Master's in international relations to figure this out.

[javy knows my name]

How are these shirts racist? A little insensitive? Sure. But Racist? It's not like they have Fukudome flying a plane with bombs falling.

How are they any less racist than references to Pearl Harbor?

 

I keep hammering this point, but racism is the belief that some races are inherently superior than others. Neither a plane nor the slanted eyes shirts are racist.

 

They are insensitive, rude, offensive, stereotypical and wrong, but not racist.

And how is making a product that highlights consensus negative stereotypes about a particular race not suggesting that that race is inherently inferior?

 

Pronunciation differences are negative?

Guess you aren't part of the consensus

[Hairyducked Idiot]

So why doesn't TBS get all kinds of angry letters when they play "A Christmas Story" every year?

[1908]

So why doesn't TBS get all kinds of angry letters when they play "A Christmas Story" every year?

Are you defending the shirts now? Or still just fixated on whether the message is racist or not? Why split that hair when you think, "They are insensitive, rude, offensive, stereotypical and wrong?"

[CyHawk_Cub]

I know I'm making a huge assumption here, since we're on an internet message board and I have no real idea as to this board's demographic, but as an American of Asian descent, I always find it bemusing to watch white people discuss race issues. Sorry, I just do.. Like any white person has a soap-dropping clue what it's like to be the target of racism & bigotry. That said, I'm not so sure that phenomena like the offending T-shirts are driven by racial hate...ignorance? Yeah... Moronic stereotype? Definitely.. In the end it doesn't matter what the motivation is though, because those who partake, even if they don't have any actual malice towards the demeaned group, are helping to perpetuate the stereotype... This type of paternalistic "oh, look at guy who's different, how cute!!" " Let's patronize him by buying a t-shirt or headband. It's really just a compliment after all..." Yeah right...it's demeaning as hell... End of rant (and gee, in another thread, I swore to never discuss race on this board... demerits to me I guess)

[Electron Blue]

anyone see THIS racist commercial

 

/no real opinion on the matter

[Jon]

It took about five seconds once I got out of the el station to see a vendor selling the t-shirts. And there were tons of people wearing the headbands which also said "horry cow."

 

On the el ride back, this drunk guy with his kids was bragging about how he got him and his kids the t-shirts before they stopped selling them. He shouted "horry cow" about 25-30 times in 20 minutes.

 

There are a crapload of ignorant and/or racist people out there.

[snoodmonger]

I know I'm making a huge assumption here, since we're on an internet message board and I have no real idea as to this board's demographic, but as an American of Asian descent, I always find it bemusing to watch white people discuss race issues. Sorry, I just do.. Like any white person has a soap-dropping clue what it's like to be the target of racism & bigotry.

 

 

That argument has never made any sense to me. You don't have to have experienced something to be able to discuss it. It's like Joe Morgan's "he never played the game, so he can't truly know" spiel. It's dumb.

 

Even if your dumb premise was right, you still need white people to enter the race discussion. I mean, how can you expect to fix the problem by cutting white people from the discussion? Absurd.

[Electron Blue]

I know I'm making a huge assumption here . . .

I always find it bemusing to watch white people discuss race issues . . .

Like any white person has a soap-dropping clue what it's like to be the target of racism & bigotry. . .

 

^---Edited to make a summary of how I took your original post.

 

An assumption, a generalization, and an exaggeration. Out of curiousity, what do you observe in "our" discussions that are troublesome?

 

You may be dead on correct with some of your feelings -- about the failure of productive race discussions. But you're not likely winning any minds with that post.