General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums40 Ways White People Say 'White People' Without Actually Saying 'White People'
1. Americans
2. Real Americans
3. Middle America
4. Working-class Americans
5. Patriots
6. Europeans
7. Southerners
8. Midwesterners
9. Millennials
10. Christians
11. Evangelicals
12. Red-state voters
13. Rust Belt voters
14. Conservatives
15. Republicans
16. Suburbanites
17. Gentrifiers
18. Families
19. Veterans
20. Soccer moms
21. Management
22. Law enforcement
23. Hard-working americans
24. The middle class
25. The upper-middle class
26. The upper class
27. Citizens
28. Taxpayers
29. Hipsters
30. Baby boomers
31. Homeowners
32. The military
33. The troops
34. Yinzers (for Pittsburgh)
35. Steel/coal/plant workers
36. Legal/documented immigrants
37. Regular/simple/decent/rural/normal Americans
38. Voters
39. Victims
40. People
https://verysmartbrothas.theroot.com/40-ways-white-people-say-white-people-without-actually-1827101126
A lot of truth in that list.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Iggo
(47,579 posts)
Thanks Iggo!
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)What is the point behind this?
So if you use one of those words you are lacking in some way?
What? Please explain with something we can see as an absolute
Loki Liesmith
(4,602 posts)Tipperary
(6,930 posts)“The Root” is the first clue.
Sigh.
Marthe48
(17,054 posts)Thank you. I'm reading through the comments on this post.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)That sets good whites apart from everyone else.
Words have a damning impact on these issues. Whether race, gender or sexual orientation related.
Racism, sexism and bigotry are the reasons, if you really needed one.
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)It’s like the wypipo thing all over again.
It exists in minds
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)We do know this as fact. Hard not to notice. It's a part of our everyday lives.
The absolutism argument here doesn't work.
Edit to add: I think the list would be well served to remove about a dozen ambiguous terms. Still, there is nothing about this concept that would stump anyone, in honest.
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)my kind of reaction and I gave it to you.
It is not informative nor is it a discussion.
There is a form and a method to many OP’s like this one.
Who is your attack point? Who is the bad man. Who is the racist behind the bushes?
OnDoutside
(19,982 posts)
moriah
(8,311 posts)... used by politicians to say to white people they're speaking to them without trying to say it outright.
But a good book is "Dog Whistle Politics" by Ian Henry Lopez. I'm sure you'll recognize parallels with ways politicians talk to/about specific demographics in your country without saying things outright, I'm not Irish so I don't know what those might be in your country's political debate.
OnDoutside
(19,982 posts)by just saying "white people", you're painting all white people with the same brush. I'm looking as an outsider, and I can clearly see that it's going to get the backs up of non RW/RWNJ/Conservative/Republican/KKK white people (and you can see that here with other psoters).
And yes we have Dog Whistle Politics here too with the Traveller community, but it would work exactly the same. Be specific, that's all, otherwise it'll hurt the message your trying to get across.
moriah
(8,311 posts)... that the only white people who refer to "European Americans" or some variation thereof here are generally white nationalists (people paranoid of becoming a minority).
The tendency to refer to a person's race only when it isn't white, isn't "other" to us, is a manifestation that we do see ourselves as the "default" and everyone else as "other". This may occur with people who aren't white of course, recognizing differences between themselves and others, but because society has been built around the assumption that whiteness IS the "default", there's little challenge to that view given to whites in American culture.
Whereas people who are what society doesn't view as the "default" are forced to confront this daily -- the knowledge they are different, that the society at large sees them as different, etc. They become used to hearing their racial identity referenced often before anything else about them. We don't.
The reason these terms seem generic and not intentional dog whistles to the "default" is that white America has been attempting to pretend race and racism doesn't exist (attempts at "colorblindness" ) as a studied defense/denial mechanism pretty much ever since it wasn't politically correct to be racist anymore. Instead of facing racism and its causes/our own contributions, it's much easier to try to forget/move on. Unfortunately, forgetting history makes us keep repeating it vs learning from it.
And much of the "default" and "other" perceptions are things we learned very early from our parents/environment. A lot of it you can intellectually shake, but it's hard to shake stuff fed to you literally with your mother's milk without critically examining things that might feel embarrassing/make you feel like a bad person or afraid people would see you/your living parents as bad people. It's the big reason most white kids don't learn just how racist certain beloved older relatives were until the stories are finally safe to tell -- they're dead. Unfortunately that's a little late for the kids.
elehhhhna
(32,076 posts)"*but only the bad ones, and if you disagree or find it offensive, you're the problem because I didnt mean you specifically but you've outed yourself by objecting"
Republicany Russiany psyops level stuff.
Garrett78
(10,721 posts)...don't mean *all* fish.
OnDoutside
(19,982 posts)
sheshe2
(83,977 posts)You are saying that I coordinated efforts with an author from the root to post something I in turn could post on DU, a website that I doubt he as ever heard of, and to top it off I told him to keep it vague. 
Dayum I am good!
52. Presumably the attack point is those of us on DU. Why else would they be so vague ?
So, with the facist Nazis white supremistists oozing white privilege from every pore in the White House and every branch of government trying to destroy the entire planet, setting up concentration camps for people less white than them and more...Your first thought is the article was about you and DU.
There is not one thing vague about the article posted.
OnDoutside
(19,982 posts)IF (which having read previous posts of yours, I doubt) you really meant "facist Nazis white supremistists" then preface white people with it. Or even RW, or Conservative, as Symone Sanders did. However, I think you know exactly what you are doing.
tonedevil
(3,022 posts)in an American publication and they are talking about working class it is almost 100% certain this is not an article about black people. That is what this is about.
sheshe2
(83,977 posts)You don't for one minute think I am talking about the dotard in chief or his minions?
103. 40 Ways White People Say 'White People' Without Actually Saying 'White People' - yeah, vague.
IF (which having read previous posts of yours, I doubt) you really meant "facist Nazis white supremistists" then preface white people with it. Or even RW, or Conservative, as Symone Sanders did. However, I think you know exactly what you are doing.
Aaah, you have read previous posts of mine and you doubt my intentions because who would know my intentions better than you.
elehhhhna
(32,076 posts)you're being too cute by half.
Fwiw I dont think WYPIPO!!! when I see many of these terms.
Reminder: time for more generalizing about WYPIPO!!!! Haven't posted that in a few days now.
sheshe2
(83,977 posts)So very sorry it disturbs you so.
Why are white people so uptight? I'm white and it doesn't bother me. I can handle the truth.
elehhhhna
(32,076 posts)sheshe2
(83,977 posts)elehhhhna
(32,076 posts)If you mean cons, say it. Words mean something. you posted this shit. Take responsibility.
sheshe2
(83,977 posts)187. Stop your circular bu!ish if I'm done i know what you want.
If you mean cons, say it. Words mean something. you posted this shit. Take responsibility.
Your post is frightening. So much anger and no substance.
"Stop your circular bu!ish if I'm done i know what you want." Is this suppose to mean something?
Response to sheshe2 (Reply #189)
Post removed
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)OnDoutside
(19,982 posts)be throwing that out there now. It's not an unreasonable request to ask you to clarify who you are addressing in your posts, if not all white people.
JustAnotherGen
(31,969 posts)I'm a black American.
Those are dog whistle words that Politicians in America use.
Working Class? White People
Americans? Especially in the Obama era? White people.
Now - we have to keep moving on.
Sheshe is a strong ally of black Americans and gets certain things that if you have experienced America as a black person -
In 2018 I'm done trying to explain things. My only empathy chip right now are the asylum seekers separated from their children and the children themselves. They are us.
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)Sheshe isn't an ally of every single black person in America.
Not all asylum seekers have been separated from their children.
And they aren't ALL of us.
You should delete your post. It's insulting or something.
I mean ...
OnDoutside
(19,982 posts)It doesn't say
40 Ways Politicians Say 'White People' Without Actually Saying 'White People'
or even more appropriately
40 Ways RW Politicians Say 'White People' Without Actually Saying 'White People'
As so many posters here say, "Words matter". I don't doubt Sheshe is a strong ally of black Americans, that's great, but posting stuff like that, without clarifying who you are targeting is short sighted. Maybe the target audience is non white, that's fine, but putting the OP in General Discussion, in that case, is going to draw comment.
JustAnotherGen
(31,969 posts)And a old WHITE guy in a fucking MAGA hat calls you a "Nigger" and "This is revenge". You are a lone woman in extreme pain trying to run simple errands.
Now - which is worse?
Because that incident up above is true and it's a TRUE threat.
I'm sorry - but it WAS a white guy and I'm not going to 'temper' my words because it makes anyone uncomfortable or 'alienates' people.
He was white.
White.
White.
White.
White.
White.
He was white!
And yes all of those words that sheshe took from one of the Very Smart Brothas? It's true. Every last one of them.
Sorry - not in the sunken place and I'm not buying the faux hysterical outrage over a bunch of words.
P.S. White politicians who are DEMOCRATICS and Democratic Socialist and Greens use them too.
P.S.S. And white people in America (and evidently abroad) fall for it too.
OnDoutside
(19,982 posts)In fairness, you described him correctly "old WHITE guy in a fucking MAGA hat", whereas the OP wrote about "White People". Do you not see the distinction ? This is like saying black people love Donald Trump, rather than correctly saying there is one black guy who turns up at Trump rallies with a Blacks for Trump sign.
I agree with the content of the OP, however the blanket "White People" by default includes your fellow DU members. That is wrong and short sighted.
JustAnotherGen
(31,969 posts)I seriously don't.
And for the record -we have had 'typical white folks' at DU. Some are still here - and still banned from the African American group.
You know - the type.
And yep, they are White People.
Sorry if you find that disturbing.
Where are you located again? It's sometimes hard to understand who black Americans REALLY think when you hear/read it for the first time.
OnDoutside
(19,982 posts)If the OP is going to be so provocative (maybe they intended it that way ?), then surely the African American group was the place to post it in ? Since this was posted in General Discussion, they can't expect everyone to fall over in agreement. It's a pity because the substance I agree with, but the scatter-gun use of "White People" does nothing for the cause they espouse, imo. I'm in Ireland, looking towards the US from the outside (it's in the name !), and hoping that the Democratic Party can get its act together to smash the neanderthals, because a healthy America is good for all of us too.
I just don't see splashing White People is in anyway helpful, more likely to get people's backs up, unless that was the aim in the first place.
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)think.
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)Iggo
(47,579 posts)Please don't even try to tell me you never noticed.
sheshe2
(83,977 posts)A black person or POC as a thug and a white person is described as a troubled young man when speaking about crime committed or victims.
Iggo
(47,579 posts)All. Fucking. Day.
I remember all those pictures and captions.
mcar
(42,424 posts)tonedevil
(3,022 posts)wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)looter.
Iggo
(47,579 posts)"Scavengers."
Add it to the list.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)But never saying '2 white people were crossing the street....."
sheshe2
(83,977 posts) 
mercuryblues
(14,550 posts)Black live Matter protests as riots, while *mostly* white people indulge in drunken revelry after their team wins a game.
Drunken revelry mars win over Michigan
https://abcnews.go.com/Sports/philly-fanatics-eagles-faithful-streets-1st-super-bowl/story?id=52842386
Super Bowl celebration in Philadelphia turns rowdy after Eagles win championship
http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2018/02/05/philly-celebration-turns-rowdy-after-eagles-win-super-bowl.html
cars were flipped. fires started, stores looted and more.
mitch96
(13,934 posts)EXACTLY!! It's implied us vs them stuff.. You hear it on the conservative forums all the time.. Oh and faux noise also.. I don't get Sinclair so I don't know about them..
m
murielm99
(30,778 posts)On one episode, they had a crime nearby.
The Muslim customer said, "I hope he is not a Muslim."
The black customer said, "I hope he is not black."
The Hispanic customer said, "I hope he is not Hispanic."
Then they looked at the news, which described him as the alleged assailant. They all breathed a sigh of relief and said, "He's white."
We know the implied stuff, the dog whistles. Let's just admit it.
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)Maybe it will come to you.
Or just consider what several of have been saying over and over and over again, apparently without being heard ...
Sailor65x1
(554 posts)Which is a shame because, compared to this intellectual powerhouse, 'Wypipo' comes off as almost genius.
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)
marble falls
(57,396 posts)its the context these words are used to make a silent detail implicit without saying anything about race. There's no argument here about those words, just how they get used to hide the undercurrent.
Like when people you may know say "high crime areas" when speaking about certain residential areas, or that a certain neighborhood wouldn't be good to move into because the "schools are bad."
Loki Liesmith
(4,602 posts)Really? Where?
Runningdawg
(4,526 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)"Really? Where?:
In the places you deny yourself the opportunity to look. Convenience allows our biases to convince us those places don't need to be looked at.
Yours is working well apparently. And consistently, as well.
No worries... bias is human nature. It's not a problem unless you allow them priority over critical thought.
Good luck! And I look forward to the righteous denials, they're often bemusing in their attempt at sincerity.
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)who don’t agree with you.
You’d admit it the reason for this OP if you were honest.
7962
(11,841 posts)I'm a favorite target of his. Never offering any opinion or fact, only attempting to display what he considers a healthy vocabulary and haughtiness. Even if, many times, words are used improperly. As pointed out in the next post!
And unique among the thousands of members here, for the years I've been reading. Sad!
Response to 7962 (Reply #64)
sheshe2 This message was self-deleted by its author.
7962
(11,841 posts)You're way off base; its not your op.
sheshe2
(83,977 posts)misread.
7962
(11,841 posts) sheshe2
(83,977 posts) Tipperary
(6,930 posts)You use it frequently, and always incorrectly.
7962
(11,841 posts)sheshe2
(83,977 posts)"Real American"
Dotard does not think that the players that take the knee in protest over police shootings of black men are 'Real Americans'. He wants them deported to hell knows where.
elehhhhna
(32,076 posts)The death of the mills irrevocably harmed the black community and destroyed workers of all races.
even wypipo.
sheshe2
(83,977 posts)ABOUT THE PROGRAM
Struggles In Steel: A Story of African-American Steelworkers is a fascinating and moving one-hour documentary that chronicles the little-known history of African-American steelworkers. Told through interviews with over 70 veteran African-American workers from America’s "Steel Belt," Struggles In Steel recounts their complex history -- a story of grueling work combined with heart-breaking discrimination and unfulfilled potential.
While jobs at the steel mills were highly sought after since they were often the highest-paying jobs available to African-American workers, these same workers were given the toughest, dirtiest and most dangerous jobs the so-called "man-killing" jobs. The African-American steelworkers, many of whom joined the mill after fighting for their country in World Wars I and II, faced discrimination from both their employers and their union and found that their chances for advancement, despite their education, qualifications or experience, were repeatedly thwarted.
The program is also the story of the end of an era in American industrialism; shortly after African-Americans were granted long-overdue workplace rights, the mills closed down, turning once-thriving middle-class communities into wastelands. Struggles In Steel is the story of generations of hard-working men and women who had to fight for the right to work at difficult jobs, facing incredible obstacles to giving their families a decent life.
http://www.newsreel.org/guides/struggles.htm
ck4829
(35,094 posts)mythology
(9,527 posts)"Very smart" indeed.
sheshe2
(83,977 posts)It is perfectly clear to me.
lunasun
(21,646 posts)
'christx30
(6,241 posts)the word 'Heart- land' usually refers to the Midwest, an area which includes the north-central states of the United States of America, specifically Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wisconsin.
http://heartlandeindhoven.nl/info_EN.php
FSogol
(45,562 posts)
NY_20th
(1,028 posts)It hurts my feelings and makes me cry
Igel
(35,382 posts)NY_20th
(1,028 posts)pwb
(11,294 posts)Is this another Putin play to divide us? I don't buy it.
malchickiwick
(1,474 posts)
wolfie001
(2,280 posts)Thanks! I'm stealing that one right now!
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)Yes there is very negative hurtful forms of racism. This isn’t that.
NY_20th
(1,028 posts)It's about implicit bias.
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)This is a game of mind fucking.
NY_20th
(1,028 posts)they think of white people.
That is why the media and others when wanting to discuss black people specifically, will take time to refer to them as i.e. black veterans, or black voters, or black middle class, etc.
When the word black, or Hispanic for that matter are removed from the descriptor, the assumption is the topic is about whites.
There's noting racist about it. It's just systemic bias. It's important for all to recognize it if we want to progress as a society.
Igel
(35,382 posts)We can dress it up in fancy ideological racial terms, if we want, but it's the same thing that makes "Czech" bring up a white face and not a Roma, "Turkish citizen" to not mean "Kurd" by default, and when we say "Mexican" we don't mean a Mayan-speaker from Oaxaca or Tohono O'odham from N. Mexico.
It's the same with common nouns. When I say "chair" you and I would probably have something similar in mind. But a stool is a kind of chair; a Lazy Boy recliner is a kind of chair; the things my mother hand with a high back and wings is a kind of chair. This goes to something called "prototype" theory--you assume that all things being equal, the most common referent is the, um, prototypical.
So when I say "spaghetti dinner" I don't think of spaghetti with alfredo sauce, nor do I think of spaghetti with butter, garlic, and barely cooked vegetables. When I say "pizza" I don't think of a white pizza. When I think "fish" I think of this and not this. My father had the same experience when he ordered a beer in a pub. He tasted it and refused to drink it, "it's not beer." Well, yes, it was, it was just not typical white working class 60-something tasteless pisswater served cold to numb the tastebuds, it was decent British stuff served at closer to room temperature.
We recognize this is something all people do when it's non-human referents. But as soon as we do the exact same thing with humans, we have to start reading stuff into it to try to take offense (or to try to stake claims to superiority). Bah. Primates.
To some extent it's community based. (Although when I hear white people say "the community" I tend to think of not a specific community, but the black, mostly urban population.) When my AfAm students say that "people don't do that" or to act like a person, they don't mean act like Prince Charles or the Chinese president Xi. They don't even mean "act like the white teacher", but they mean "act like a typical member of my community." The way prototype theory is implemented varies a bit, making it uneasily squishy. But there's still some truth to it. The only thing is, unless you step back from a particular instance to see the larger pattern in the language as a whole (instead of stepping back just far enough to find examples that support and 'prove' your theory), you don't see it.
Captain Stern
(2,201 posts)I mean that in all sincerity.
It's posts like this that make me feel like it was worth my time to check in on DU.
NY_20th
(1,028 posts)I love the perspective and examples you've applied in defining it.
Thank you. 
yonder
(9,683 posts)
Beartracks
(12,821 posts)Thank you!
=======
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)Thank you.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,123 posts)
Kind of Blue
(8,709 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(49,052 posts)What word do you propose to use instead of "middle class" when a writer or speaker means
noun: middle class; plural noun: middle classes; noun: middleclass; plural noun: middleclasses
1. the social group between the upper and working classes, including professional and business workers and their families.
?
NY_20th
(1,028 posts)many tend to picture a white middle class in their mind. That is why when the media wants to explicitly discuss black middle class, they feel the need to add black as a descriptor.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,052 posts)The OP is about "saying" not "hearing".
If the problem is what white people "hear" (picture in their minds) then the problem is not writing or saying "people" or "voter".
NY_20th
(1,028 posts)That's why many writers feel the need to add descriptors such as "black middle class" when they are directly speaking of black middle class.
The words "middle class" alone, is imagined as being "white middle class" in the eyes of white people.
And yes, the problem is definitely what white people hear.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,052 posts)NY_20th
(1,028 posts)not everyone is susceptible to implicit bias, but most are, and that's a big problem.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,052 posts)The writer is Lurie Daniel Favors.
NY_20th
(1,028 posts)No group of people are monolithic. Not all black people view discrimination the same, not all women view sexism the same, etc.
There will never be 100 percent agreement on anything.
But when the majority of people see something, believe something, there's some truth to it that needs to be recognized.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,052 posts)If it would be better to write in a more fully qualified way "the middle class including blacks" then it would be better to write that with phrases like "some white people" or "many white people" or even "too many white people". Don't you think that would be following the spirit of what you propose other writers do?
NY_20th
(1,028 posts)having to qualify it as "the middle class including blacks" is still separating blacks from what is considered the middle class.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,052 posts)So you still have not given advice about how to write "middle class" when what is meant is exactly "middle class".
If it is wrong (implicitly or explicitly) for a writer of unknown race to write "middle class" for fear that their readers will hear "white middle class", then how is that writer supposed to be inclusive with including because including is separating, according to your statement.
Apparently writing "middle class" is wrong and "middle class including blacks" is wrong too; then what is right for a writer of unspecified race to write to a reader of unspecified race?
NY_20th
(1,028 posts)Just that it invokes implicit bias.
I want you to examine why the word black needs to be included when discussing such groups.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,052 posts)I don't feel it needs to be included.
I think "people" means people of all kinds. I think the word "black" does not need to be included when writing about the "middle class" because there are many blacks in the middle class.
I thought I had made that clear. Perhaps I had not.
NY_20th
(1,028 posts)and that you don't necessarily picture only white people when these words appear in ink,
but many, many, if not most white people do not come to your same conclusion.
Most white people, when they hear these words, only think of white people. They don't think of diversity, as you do.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,052 posts)Damned if you do and damned if you don't (as a writer), it seems.
NY_20th
(1,028 posts)This is one of the most frustrating things when discussing bias. People who don't want to see it, won't see it.
There seems to be a steadfast refusal to see it.
However, I also find that I enjoy conversating with you.
So perhaps we can leave the conversation for another day, when a fresh perspective might stimulate further conversation.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,052 posts)I do see that lots of white people visualize or "hear" (think of) only white people when reading "people" for example and that it is considered by them some kind of default. I'm well aware of that.
But the fault is in the reader and not the writer. Unless the writer is like the headline writers you and others cite. That requires cases written by the same headline writer for comparison or the same (corporate) headline writing culture. Or unless the writer drops other clues in the article or other articles as to their assumptions and biases. Or they write in a biased context such as alt-right publications.
However, I'm fine with letting it rest for another day. On that note, I'm not likely to reply further, so you are likely to have the last word if you wish to reply again.
NY_20th
(1,028 posts)and thank you for a thoughtful discussion.
elehhhhna
(32,076 posts)A twofer! since that's the point.
NY_20th
(1,028 posts)elehhhhna
(32,076 posts)shut du down, now!!!! It's fucking COVERED with words!
/s
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)And when we reference our fellow duers, I guess white duers think all du is white according to this idiotic theory that certain people are pushing here.
elehhhhna
(32,076 posts)cwydro
(51,308 posts)Some on DU seem to feel it more important to start some pointless squabble with their fellow DUers than to concentrate on who the real enemy is.
Children are in cages, but let’s start silly OPs to call our fellow Dems stupid names. Smh.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)
sheshe2
(83,977 posts) oberliner
(58,724 posts)And: "I Don't Give a Damn About Unity"
Typical of The Root.
elehhhhna
(32,076 posts)If du goes all Hannity, we are finished here.
Overgeneralizing provocative trolly content is allowed now? From whom? Towards
whom? and why? I want a list.
FakeNoose
(32,833 posts)For example, I live in Pittsburgh and I know for a fact that "Yinzer" has no racial connotation.
A person who uses the Pittsburghese dialect is usually under-educated, and the word "yinz" is sometimes used as the plural for "you." It's equivalent to a southerner saying "Y'all" or "you all" but in Pittsburgh is comes out "yinz." So under-educated people in southwestern Pennsylvania who speak this way are called "Yinzers" and it's sort of a joke on ourselves. OK maybe black people don't speak this way so much, but they could and it wouldn't mean they were racist. When we call ourselves Yinzers we're not separating out the white people.
Christians, veterans, baby boomers, voters, and several other terms on this list could mean white, black or any race/color. I get their point but I think they've really overplayed this. The list could have been cut in half and it would have been more effective IMHO.
TCJ70
(4,387 posts)This is a garbage OP.
sheshe2
(83,977 posts)26. Yeah! Fuck Americans, amirite!?
That is exactly what the OP implies.
TCJ70
(4,387 posts)What word would you use for middle class other than middle class? Americans? Families? Voters? Good grief.
What do non-white people mean when they use these words? Do they all just mean white? This OP is extremely asinine.
There are a great many DUers who use these words on a regular basis and you can bet that a good number of them are white. Are they also just being biased in their speech? Is that an accusation you feel comfortable with throwing at people on this board?
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)It does fascinate me that these posters continue to post these type things here. I assume they must believe duers need educating about racism. Somehow they think they are better educated than many of us, although they cannot possibly know what work we have done to rid our society of racism, prejudice, etc. or what our relationships are with POC. Duers are Dems, but for some reason these posters think we need lecturing.
I would be more impressed if they went over to the site that cannot be mentioned with their lectures.
Or, as others have suggested, these type ops are intended to divid One cannot help but wonder what they intend to accomplish.
Trashing thread.
OnDoutside
(19,982 posts)In the Nashville show of Pod Save America, someone was slagging White people, when Symone Sanders injected "Conservative white people". You would thought progressives would have the knowledge and class to recognise the scattergun slur hurts their message.
MrScorpio
(73,631 posts)The likelihood of each and every one them coming up with white people primarily as examples are pretty high... But somehow, we're not supposed to notice that.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,052 posts)It's a fault of the example makers. It would be much more productive to attack the example makers than people of any color who say "people".
What would do you propose that people should use when they want to say (and mean) people?
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)That is racist.
MineralMan
(146,339 posts)Yes, indeed.
egduj
(807 posts)cyclonefence
(4,483 posts)Being reminded of the bias in our country isn't an accusation against DU. It does us all good, I think, to have these gentle, almost humorous reminders of how sneaky institutional racism is. Nobody is suggesting that these terms not be used; just be aware of the implications, and if we can, confuse RWers by referring to POC by some of these descriptors.
There's nothing divisive here unless you choose to be offended where there really is no offense. I see this as a unifying post, actually; it assumes that we are all woke enough to chuckle at the presumptions racists shelter.
MrScorpio
(73,631 posts)But there it is and we have to always deal with it.
Croney
(4,673 posts)
happy feet
(872 posts)sheshe2
(83,977 posts)Thank you, cyclonefence.
PunkinPi
(4,882 posts) EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)uponit7771
(90,367 posts)EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)I posted the following as an OP a couple of months ago and think it’s pertinent to this discussion
An Observation About White People and Wypipo
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100210581983
There’s been quite the kerfuffle here the last couple of days involving discussions of the word “Wypipo” with some white DUers getting very upset with the notion of using any race-identifying term to describe the behaviors of any subset of white people.
This is not the first time I’ve seen reactions like this from some whites - not just to such terms as “Wypipo” but to ANY reference to their race. One sure way to get a reaction on DU is to post anything that includes the term “white people.” As sure as day follows night, several white folk will strenuously object and we’ll see responses that have become so common, they have their own hashtags, such as #notallwhitepeople.
Yet, by the same token white folk seem to have no trouble at all identifying other racial groups and other demographics by their identifying characteristics - African-Americans, women, LGBQT, Muslims, etc. - and they do so frequently and without any self-consciousness or shame (often the very same post in which they complain about being referred to as “white”).
I’ve long been fascinated by this dynamic, so I used to conduct an experiment with my law students on the first day of class. I’d casually ask all of the black students to raise their hands. Without hesitation, the black students all raised their hands. And, invariably, the white students would turn toward the black students, anticipating that they WOULD raise their hands.
Then I’d ask all of the white students to raise their hands. But, instead of raising their hands, most of them just sat there and stared at me like I’d lost my damned mind. When I pressed them - “C’mon - raise your hands!” - a couple of them would do it grudgingly, but the others still didn’t want to and got very agitated, asking why THEY were being singled out by race. “Why are you asking. What does are race have to do with anything?”
They also frequently turned toward their black classmates and either tacitly or sometimes outright asked them to say something about how wrong this was (“Aren’t you gong t say anything?” “This is so wrong. Why aren’t you saying anything?”).
This led to some very interesting discussions. For example, the black students asked their white classmates why they didn't object when I first singled them out - not only did they not object, but they fully expected the black students to identify themselves - yet the white students expected the black students to defend them when it was THEIR turn in the barrel.
When I asked the black students why they complied so quickly, they usually just shrugged and said it was no big deal. They often noted that they were so used to being seen and identified as black, they thought nothing of it. And since I hadn’t said anything derogatory or suggested that I was going to treat them any differently or worse just because they were black, they weren’t concerned.
On the other hand, the white students said it made them very uncomfortable. The most common response was along the lines of, “I don’t think of myself as a white person. I’m just a person.” One student said she was afraid that, because I was black, my noticing they were white and saying it out loud meant that I planned to discriminate against them in favor of the black students.
I used this to help demonstrate how minorities are so accustomed to being identified as subgroups, to be singled out as minorities, while white people saw themselves, not as a group, but as just people and really resented being identified by their race. It also showed how minorities tend not to immediately assume that racial identifications include an inherent racial bias or judgment - without more, they see it as simply a description (“That white lady over there said the store closes at 5”), while whites tend to assume any racial identification is per se discriminatory - at least when applied to them.
That helps to explain why some white acquaintances get very uncomfortable when I say, for example, “I’ll meet you in the cafe at 3. I’m black and will be wearing a beige coat.” They’re ok with the coat, but don’t want me to think they’ll notice that I’m black - even though that’s the most logical way to spot me in restaurant filled with mostly white people - because they think that means they’re “being racist.”
So, I think the upset about “Wypipo” stems largely from a real discomfort, not just with a subset of white folk being poked fun at for certain behaviors that invite ridicule, but from the larger and deeper unease that many white people have at being identified as “white” at all, i.e., something other than just “people.”
cyclonefence
(4,483 posts)and it made me newly aware of the fact that I readily describe a black person as black, but don't mention race when the person being described is white--because "white" is the norm? I've been making an effort to use the term "white' when I'm describing someone, and it feels odd, but I know it's right.
A couple of years ago, I started trying to describe to myself the faces of the black women I know well. I confess that the thought came to me from watching cop shows where the victim is asked to describe the criminal for an artist. I wondered if I'd be able to describe one of my black acquaintances well enough that she could be ID'd from my description (not because I'd ever think they would be suspects!). This is an exercise I'd recommend to all white people, actually. "They all look alike" isn't a joke. The women I know quite well, women I see every day, are as distinct individuals as anybody else I know, yet I was stymied at first by how I would describe their eyes, their noses, their lips, their hair. I realized I wasn't really seeing them as individual people, and this was a punch in the gut for me. I've known these women for years, and I truly love some of them and know they love me, but I was not *seeing* them as individual people. I'm continuing to make a conscious effort to "learn" their faces, and I'm ashamed that I have to do this.
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)Whatvan interesting perspective. You should make this an OP.
elehhhhna
(32,076 posts)EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)Plenty of non-freepers, including lots of progressive Democrats don't get it, as evidenced right here in this thread.
fishwax
(29,149 posts)
ck4829
(35,094 posts)White supremacy and white privilege is a contributing factor to the Trump occupation.
geardaddy
(24,931 posts)Bradical79
(4,490 posts)If it were only a conservative problem, we would have made a lot more progress.
It's obvious that this list is in reference to certain types of rhetoric, where it's clear through context that non-white people are excluded in their descriptors. Democrats saying we failed to connect with "working class Americans" despite winning the working class vote are an example. Really they meant white blue collar workers, as if they're the only ones that matter.
JustAnotherGen
(31,969 posts)Because the default is that if you are black - you aren't any of those things.
Very Smart Brotha's hit it out the ballpark again!
MrScorpio
(73,631 posts)It's really not that hard of a concept to understand... Unless you're never treated as one of the outliers.
cwydro
(51,308 posts)To, too, two. Different meanings.
Homonyms can be difficult.
TygrBright
(20,775 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(49,052 posts)When you claim that "management" is a code word for "white", how do you expect to get non-whites interested in management and career advancement? Shouldn't you be about opening doors, not closing them?
As if many people of color are not in the middle class or working class.
People? What alternative do you suggest for "people" or "Americans"?
tonedevil
(3,022 posts)that when you talk about middle class if you do not add the modifier black everyone who hears you will assume white. If you use the word Americans without said modifier everyone who hears you will assume you mean white. If you use the word thug without a modifier to indicate you are talking about a white person the assumption will be that you are referring to a black person. No one is saying don't use the words just try to notice and maybe even help change the tide where language makes it so black people loot where white people scavenge.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,052 posts)... when what is meant is "middle class", meaning
noun: middle class; plural noun: middle classes; noun: middleclass; plural noun: middleclasses
1. the social group between the upper and working classes, including professional and business workers and their families.
?
You are suggesting we have to write like
"Middle class (including black people and not excluding hispanics, asians and native americans) incomes have not kept pace with upper class (including black people and not excluding hispanics, asians and native americans) incomes. The same can be said for working class (including black people and not excluding hispanics, asians and native americans) incomes. Members of the middle class (including black people and not excluding hispanics, asians and native americans) are living more frequently without more than a couple months of savings.
Americans (including black people and not excluding hispanics, asians and native americans) need to reduce income inequality between the poor (including black people and not excluding hispanics, asians and native americans) and the rich (including black people and not excluding hispanics, asians and native americans)."
It's nonsense.
tonedevil
(3,022 posts)the article produced a list of words and said do not use them. If you read the words that were written the article does not even suggest that these are now banned words. So you don't have to find a new word for middle class or any of those other words. The article is trying to point out there are many words and phrases that convey "race" without explicitly mentioning it. Rather than middle class I find looter and scavenger more enlightening. It's not that examples of white looter don't exist in the media, but I have seen scavenger and pictures of white people while never seeing the same with black people.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,052 posts)tonedevil
(3,022 posts)there is no such implication. That there is a prohibition on the use of those words is your invention.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,052 posts)Note: "say" is in the title.
The article and OP are nonsense.
Now if (as other posters here have) there is to be a discussion about "hearing", then that needs to be a completely separate thread because the OP / article is explicitly not about "hearing".
tonedevil
(3,022 posts)I don't think I understand anything you write and just like I when don't understand what the man ranting on the street corner is saying I don't find I have missed anything important.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,052 posts)The article is about "saying" which is not "hearing". However almost all of the posts are about what people are "hearing". That is not what the article is about.
tonedevil
(3,022 posts)the article is a list of words that when used without modifier default to white people nothing more, nothing less.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,052 posts)tonedevil
(3,022 posts)sheshe2
(83,977 posts)123. OK I wasn't clear enough. Let me try to be clearer for you
The article is about "saying" which is not "hearing". However almost all of the posts are about what people are "hearing". That is not what the article is about.
Perhaps people should just sit back and listen instead of attacking and wailing about 'not all white people' which none ever said. Some may need their hearing checked.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,052 posts)Or do you mean that black people mean white people when they write people?
sheshe2
(83,977 posts)His picture is posted.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,052 posts)that "a writer" does not mean "the writer".
NY_20th
(1,028 posts)since they are subjected to white people and white people views daily, so when a black person is talking about people, in general, their mental picture likely includes white people as well.
It is white people who fall into their cocoon of only seeing white people, so when a white person writes about people, they are picturing only white people.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,052 posts)2) You don't address the question posed, though you are excused because it mentioned someone else.
"How do You (tonedevil) know the race of a writer? You do not."
Since nobody knows the race of a writer given only the words they have written, then you can't know if that writer means "black people" or "white people" when they write "people", so the safest assumption is that the writer really means "people". It would be most respectful to take writers words as written until there is some truly indicative evidence that they do not mean what they have written.
3) Again you are confusing writing with hearing. The OP was about "saying" and implicitly writing as a form of "speech".
If the problem is what white people "hear" (picture in their minds) then the problem is not writing or saying "people" or "voter".
NY_20th
(1,028 posts)I am very aware of how many white people still hold bias, even if it's unconscious,
I am very aware that many white people get upset simply by hearing the words "white people".
I am very aware that when white people write with generic terms, they mean white people.
I am very aware of this because I am old enough to remember when newspapers would point out the race of a person who committed a crime.
i.e. If it was a white man who burglarized a house, the headline would be "Man burglarizes house."
But if it was a black man who burglarized a house, the headline would be "Black Man burglarizes house."
White people have bias, and in some cases racism, that they don't even realize they have.
https://gendercreativelife.com/2017/11/21/the-kind-of-racism-you-dont-even-know-you-have/
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,052 posts)Now, your example about the burglary headline is cogent but the OP and article are bogus.
NY_20th
(1,028 posts)you mean all people and picture it as such.
But the fact remains that the majority of other people don't.
This OP isn't meant to get through to you, you clearly get it.
It's for the people who don't. How do we get them to see and address it when they refuse to?
tonedevil
(3,022 posts)Damon Young is from his work, he is a very prolific author, and while "race" is a fiction he fits the description of what is conventionally thought to be a Black Person. I'm probably missing something where did Mr. Young mention people with no racial modifier?
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,052 posts)When a writer writes words it is respectful to read them as written and not turn "a writer" into "the writer" and then respond to "the writer".
Similarly, when a writer writes "people" it is respectful to that writer to assume they mean "people" and not "white people" until or unless there is good indication otherwise. For example if the URL is from an alt-right site.
I write carefully and I like it when people respect me enough to read what I have written as I have written it. When the reader turns one word into another I don't like that so much but I don't and can't control the reader.
I am "a writer" and you are "a writer" and a random poster in this thread is "a writer" but none of us are "the writer" of the article. "a" is a distinct word with a distinct meaning different from "the".
But if you wanted to hear "the", that's not my problem it is your problem.
tonedevil
(3,022 posts)I was in too much of a hurry and did not read for the difference of a and the. A not insignificant difference I will say, point taken.
njhoneybadger
(3,910 posts) mcar
(42,424 posts) sheshe2
(83,977 posts) EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)Last edited Tue Jun 26, 2018, 06:15 AM - Edit history (1)
Great list, btw.
sheshe2
(83,977 posts)but the black person I quoted never said wypipo and just look where we are at here. 
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)Folk are losing their effing minds!
sheshe2
(83,977 posts)The word alone...white people causes outrage because not all white people or some such. It was never said and never implied yet the are outraged. Why is that?
elehhhhna
(32,076 posts)Not youof course.
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)How come?
Iggo
(47,579 posts)sheshe2
(83,977 posts)I did not make the list, you can follow the link and see.
Also, white people do not call themselves or others wypipo and the black author knows that. Pretty sure that is why it was excluded from the list.
ismnotwasm
(42,021 posts) Croney
(4,673 posts)Shit. Forgot blue collar. And also white collar. Apparently white people are the only people with collars.
I’d call them Collared People but that sounds too much like Colored People and, well, you know.
Xipe Totec
(43,892 posts)White man translates to Spanish as hombre blanco.
But hombre translates back to English as man, or as human.
Blanco translates back to English as white, or as target.
So, hombre blanco can translate to human target.
sarisataka
(18,839 posts)
ejbr
(5,857 posts)
ecstatic
(32,752 posts)
Nitram
(22,915 posts)unconscious racism of which we are all guilty. Oops, that "we" was another one.
Roy Rolling
(6,943 posts)We white people is all alike.
Thanks for sharing. I was beginning to think that words have different and nuanced meanings, but now I know there is only a secret code we white people use. I wish I'd have learned that earlier. I could have used that code. I *am* white! Where's my share?
My point? Yeah some racists talk behind peoples' backs. Lumping all white people in that group is racist. Most white people are not racist, accusing a whole race of a secret, code-word use is not helpful. White people want racists and racism eliminated as much as African-Americans.
bullwinkle428
(20,631 posts)YEARS AND YEARS, and I always got the dog whistle each time.
elehhhhna
(32,076 posts)By God i mean the old white grandpa on a cloud, obvs, the one with the blonde
Blue eyed son.
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)Since, after all, referring to white people inflicts all manner of untold suffering on you.
Chemisse
(30,819 posts)With some exceptions I agree to this.
However I disagree that this is the case in everyday conversations by all white people, which of course is the implication in the OP.
Your lack of precision in the wording in presenting this guarantees that the discussion will NOT focus on awareness of coded language, which would be of value to us all on DU. Don't you agree it would be better to talk about this issue rather than annoy and confuse those who are white among us?
Enlightenment is great; divisiveness is bad.
bucolic_frolic
(43,393 posts)
ucrdem
(15,512 posts) sarisataka
(18,839 posts)
thucythucy
(8,102 posts)which almost invariably means rural and white.
As if people living in cities are either unreal or "un-American."
Sarah Palin did/does this all the time.
Two more to add to the list (though these are slightly dated):
"The Silent Majority" and "The Moral Majority."
The first coined during the reign of Richard "Southern Strategy" Nixon, the second during the reign of Ronald "I began my campaign in the heartland of the KKK" Reagan.
Oh, is "heartland" on the list? "What do people in the heartland think?"
So what are the rest of us--chopped liver?
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)Looking back on it seems really obvious but it didn't then. In Calif "homeowner" and "taxpayer" are also used as dog-whistles by white guys running against Latinos, as in "Nelson-Smith is endorsed by the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers association. Does this make you more or less likely to vote for Nelson-Smith over James Ramos?"
I got one of those "survey" calls a few days ago. Subtle they aren't. 
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)change them only our selves.
The right will continue to use dog whistles because it works for them.
R B Garr
(16,998 posts)
LakeArenal
(28,863 posts)40 words that call people racists without really saying the word racist.
Heartstrings
(7,349 posts)
gulliver
(13,197 posts)Sowing division for zero reason.
Response to sheshe2 (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
samir.g
(835 posts)whistler162
(11,155 posts)so you believe that no one but white people fall into those terms.....
sheshe2
(83,977 posts) moriah
(8,311 posts)If you're white, how often do you say "This white guy" vs "this guy", or intellectually avoid using "this black/Hispanic guy" when you don't have to do that internal bit of PC dancing when speaking of a white person -- does "this guy" truly always roll off naturally and smoothly, with no thought about their race, the same no matter what?
Because "whiteness" is perceived by whites and the society highly influenced by such thinking as the "default", while both races develop a perception of "like me" and "other", whites easily respond to generic statements as referring to themselves. We aren't confronted with our whiteness often, or the fact we are the "default" American society built racial identity and politics around, but the generic statements resonate in similar ways to reflect "default" and seem to have positive connotations vs obvious dog whistles about other races reflect "other" with negative ones.
People society labels as "other", however, are confronted daily with being what society labels as "other". They're Asian-Americans, or black managers, or Latino voters. Before their identification as people, there's the racial identification. Even in attempts to write positive articles, it adds a paternalistic note often.
Kind of Blue
(8,709 posts)Bradical79
(4,490 posts)
grantcart
(53,061 posts)Obviously they are terms that are used in a specific context to frame a statement so that "on the hand we have <insert term> ('hard working tax payers') while on the other hand we have people trying to beat the system".
It's not that the words have any inherent pejorative bias but it shows how many different ways the same idea can be framed.
Interesting how defensive <insert term> get when the group they identify with is used to show inherent majority bias.
I only identify as a descendent Mitochondrial Eve. As long as you'd don't disparage my great (times 2,500) grandmother you can't upset me.
PubliusEnigma
(1,583 posts)Gather your tribe and Donald Trump will gather his.
Tribalism is memetic, not genetic.
We are all humans, and that is all that we are.
Doodley
(9,152 posts)tonedevil
(3,022 posts)that make me do this and softly sigh wypipo.
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)The military? Have you been in the military? I have. People of color are well represented there. Most of my superiors were POC. And most of my brothers/sisters in arms.
I sometimes wonder about the most vocal here...I wonder if they work with people of other races or colors. I work with people of color, and I live next door to them. I am friends with them; I play tennis in my doubles foursome with my “poc” friends”, my workout buddy is “poc.” I put quotes around those adjectives because labels are not anything any of us engage in.
I wonder again about some posters here. I suspect some of the most vocal about these issues really know nothing about what they speak.
I could go on about this nonsense list, but I will choose not to do so. God damn, this shit is annoying.
sheshe2
(83,977 posts)The 'Resident has no respect for them
Trump Denies Telling Wife of Slain Soldier ‘He Knew What He Signed Up For’
When asked on Monday why he had yet to say anything about the deaths of four U.S. service members killed when they were ambushed by ISIS fighters in Niger on October 4, President Trump said he had drafted letters to their loved ones, and planned to call them too. Then he tried to deflect criticism by falsely suggesting that President Obama and his other predecessors did not regularly call the families of fallen soldiers.
Trump then doubled down on the claim, implying that Obama hadn’t called his chief of staff John Kelly after his son was killed in Afghanistan in 2010. Kelly, who has tried to keep his son’s death out of the political arena, attended at least two events the Obamas held for military families in the years after his son’s death.
Incredibly, the story took an even more appalling turn on Tuesday evening. In his call with Sergeant La David T. Johnson’s widow, Myeshia Johnson, on Tuesday, Trump said, “He knew what he signed up for … but when it happens, it hurts anyway,” according to Representative Frederica Wilson.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/10/trump-told-widow-of-soldier-knew-what-he-signed-up-for.html
Link to tweet
BumRushDaShow
(129,737 posts)Really? You think so? Did you bother checking or did you just blurt out that falsehood to preface some point? Distortions like that are a sure sign of a problem because we see far too many folks do this when race is discussed.
OnDoutside
(19,982 posts)Kind of Blue
(8,709 posts)is not black. The following are just the Southern States with the highest concentrations of black people as of 2016. Now, I've read that black people are returning to the South but I doubt that those who have migrated even approach 50 percent in the densest populations as of 2018. Maybe you have newer stats.
MS black 37%/white 58%
NC 21%/61%
SC 26%/65%
GA 32%/52%
AL 27%/66%
LA 32%/59%
https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/distribution-by-raceethnicity/?activeTab=map¤tTimeframe=0&selectedDistributions=black&sortModel=%7B"colId":"Location","sort":"asc"%7D
ecstatic
(32,752 posts)Last edited Tue Jun 26, 2018, 05:42 AM - Edit history (1)
that's always in reference to someone white. Some words on the list are silly/hyperbole, but many are spot on.
Edited to clarify: The girl/boy next door is an extremely common phrase and I do not believe that the use of the phrase signifies racist intentions, in most cases.
elehhhhna
(32,076 posts)Wypipo were super shittyobvious then !!1!!
/s
Gothmog
(145,722 posts)Deplorables
KKK members
Nazis
Neo-Nazis
MAGA Cap wearers
Huckabees
Trumpsters
Trump family members
progree
(10,927 posts)the white butt-hurt....
Afromania
(2,771 posts)Last edited Tue Jun 26, 2018, 06:19 PM - Edit history (2)
Just reading through the thread here not surprised at some of the dense reactions to how the media uses these words as euphemisms for white people. Now, in case some of you don't quite get it, words can be used in different ways. When you want to say something without saying that particular something you go about hiding it in other words.
Still with me? Good. Anyway, these listed words are used as cover when folks given a platform want to lend particular importance to a particular set of people and their circumstances. Republicans like to do this a lot when they talk about "real america, or the heartland, or mainstreet , or blue collar workers," or any of the words listed really. When they do this they are pandering to areas that are whiter than most, rural, and of course republican.
For the sake of expediency I'll wrap all the words up into one phrase "real Americans". What makes these people real Americans vs the rest of America. Have they been here longer? Do they pay more taxes or work more in more dangerous occupations then everybody else? What is is that makes them "real Americans" worthy of distinction and import vs so many other Americans. For that you need the common theme and that common theme is the color of their skin, white, usually republican and willing to accept the fallacy of the them vs others mentality.
When these words(well most of them) are used in a political setting they are being used to denote that those particular white people are more worthy, and more deserving of being listened to. Much more so than any of the minorities in this country or the white people here who do not prescribe to their way of seeing and treating those unlike themselves. These words can, and are, used like dog whistles to denote that some Americans are lesser and as such. A far less important to how the country functions as a whole. Furthermore these "others" do not deserve to have their words of complaint listened no matter how critical they are until the "real Americans" have all of their fears assuaged no matter how frivolous and far fetched they might be.
Don't let the throw in of, perhaps, handful of words to the list detract from the importance of how politically divisive the use of these code words have been when used within the context of discussions of a political, economic or cultural nature. To do so, or to find what aboutism counter arguments for the meaning behind the op is to either be unable to grasp the unspoken point behind the terms or to be ignorant of the point by choice.
In either case the results are exactly the same. White people using words to self identify themselves from minorities communities. They are all commonly used by that particular set of white people all the time to self describe. When these words are taken up by politicians, writers, and talking heads to describe these folks it only affirms what the preconceived notions of that particular subset of white people believe. If their problems are the ones that need to be paramount what happens to critical problems of those the "real Americans" label the other? What always happens, sadly, they will be ignored.
R B Garr
(16,998 posts)
yuiyoshida
(41,867 posts)Its true I have Japanese ancestry, but I was born in the United States. I have often been told to go the fuck back to China, on line... stupid people (and those screaming TRUMP! Trump! Trump!) in my virtual (on line) face.
MineralMan
(146,339 posts)As you say, "A lot of truth in that list."
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)decoder ring
MineralMan
(146,339 posts)geardaddy
(24,931 posts)
Kind of Blue
(8,709 posts)your incredible strength to stand so boldly with us on so many levels.
I'm just grateful.
sheshe2
(83,977 posts)
Puzzler
(2,505 posts)-Puzzler
hueymahl
(2,510 posts)I might quibble with a couple of them, but GOOD list.
keepleft101
(82 posts)lets divide us even more
harun
(11,348 posts)"Property Rights Advocates" too perhaps.
azureblue
(2,154 posts)show at least you had grade school level geography:
French
Basque
Spanish
Portuguese
Belgian
Danish
German
Austrian
Swiss
Dutch
Polish
Albanian
Croatian
Slavic
Finnish
Swedish
All types of Russian people (sorry, my Russian studies are weak)
Italian
Sicilian
British
Irish
Welsh
Scots
Aussie
Kiwis (New Zealand)
and I'm sure I have left out at least a dozen. But what do they have in common? White skin. What do they not have in common? Geography and language. And what do they still not have in common when they come to the US? Their ethnicity. And they sure don't all dress like Chad and Becky. And some of these white people are actually poor and don't wear topsiders every day. But they are all white so never mind that. Want to start a fight? Get an Irish catholic and a British Protestant drunk, and stand back. Call a Sicilian, "Italian". Praise Russia in front of a Slav or Croatian. So let's drop this "All White people are alike" crap. Why, would you believe it- some of these white folks actually go to black doctors and lawyers. Amazing.
Now Damon's list:
Funny but I have actually seen with my own two eyes:
Black Americans
Black Middle Class Americans
Black Working Class Americans
Black Europeans (French and English)
Black Patriots (I met a red tail WW11 vet, and know several Black folks who have served their country)
Black Southerners (OMFG - is the author that out of it?)
And on and on.
For the most part, you can almost put the word "black" in front of everything on his list, and be right.
I first thought what Damon wrote was satire on the "All Black people look alike to me". As if all black people have the same heritage and facial construction. But it isn't - he, without a trace of irony, put this on line. Jeez, I may be a Sicilian by blood, but at least I know that people from Ghana don't look the same as Botswanans, Tunisians, Senegalese, Nigerians. Or any of the 54 countries in Africa.
So, Damon, before you write any more of these cliches, give it a little more thought, would you?
tonedevil
(3,022 posts)you put black in front of it. Without the modifier the default assumption is they are white.
sheshe2
(83,977 posts)tonedevil
(3,022 posts)a lot of guilty consciences with this. It's like a teacher saying the parent of the child who misbehaved is a bad parent. In answer a single child in the class stands to say they didn't do the act they are accused of and admonishes the teacher to stop talking about their parent. They don't even see how they expose themselves.
sheshe2
(83,977 posts)However others do.
TCJ70
(4,387 posts)As a follow up, what non-biased replacement words should white people use for families? Voters? Americans?
The poster you responded to isn’t saying you should put black in front of those words. They’re arguing that you DON’T have to. These words are already vague enough to include groups other than white people.
If you want to say, people here different things when different phrases are used, that’s fine. But that’s not what the OP says. It says that when white people speak these words it’s code, and that’s bullshit.
tonedevil
(3,022 posts)you are asking people for replacement words like they told you not to use the words on the list. There is no mandate regarding the words that is something you are making it up. Whine all you like, but the answer will be the same from me, I'm not telling you to find alternative words and I'm not obliged to make any up to satisfy your obvious guilt regarding race.
TCJ70
(4,387 posts)I'm not the one suggesting "families/voters/middle class" = "white people". Also, if you're going to insist that using these words is code, you should at least have a solution in place. After all, we should be trying avoid racially biased code words, right?
tonedevil
(3,022 posts)that the list is just a list and not an action item I have nothing more to offer.
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)They are convinced they are on to something.
It is exactly like trying to talk to wing nuts
Bradical79
(4,490 posts)It's really not complicated or offensive.
moriah
(8,311 posts)When we think of ourselves as the majority, and unless "black" or "Latino" or "Asian" is placed in front of the generic identification, it's a dog-whistle to the "default" race. Like you did with everyone you listed. And while I know this was "The Root" so you immediately went with black, the same pretty much applies for other minority ethnic/racial groups.
Seriously. Be honest with yourself, if you're white at least, here -- do you ever find yourself doing the internal dance to avoid referring to a person's race? If you do, do you EVER do it with a white person, or does "this guy" simply roll off the tongue just as naturally no matter what the race is of the person you're speaking of?
As whites, we are conditioned to think of ourselves when people use a generic identifier. It's simply what happens when children perceive differences between themselves and others and then society reinforces the view that they are the "default" without making us question that assumption. As whites, we never face the things that people who aren't seen the "default" race face daily, pointing to their differentness, their otherness -- and that's not our fault, it's simply part of the society that got built long before we were born, influenced our parents, and therefore influenced us. And statements that themselves seem very generic are often used by politicians as dog-whistles to the "default" race -- us.
Getting offended and running from this doesn't change how politicians use those words, or how average white people responds to generic descriptors as representative of themselves. Unfortunately because so often even in attempted positive media coverage, people who are "other" vs "default" are so often referred to by their racial or ethnic identifier before even the word identifying who they are as people -- Southerners, Americans, voters -- the "others" hear the dog-whistle easier than we do. They can see things from their perspective we have seen so often we have become oblivious to it.
If nothing else, the idea of "fear of the other" is moving American politics to a significant degree now. Xenophobia explains so much of both what Trump does that is also racist, and why so many of his defenders try to make it about racism against blacks. But "whiteness as default" leads to not just one ethnic group getting targeted, but fear of everyone who doesn't look like us. And we see that clearly if we look at the way Trump's supporters immediately try to go to defending racism against other groups by asking people to point to racism against blacks. They still don't understand racism comes from a "default vs other" mentality instead of a "white vs black" mentality.
