You know, there have been a lot of responses to this post that address most of my concerns with it. Heck I even started a massively long reply (that tumblr ate because it’s such an amazing website) a while ago. But in reality, these claims don’t really need much to rebut them. So let’s go. Right down the line. Let’s figure out which of these claims are insulting a particular person, which of these claims are innocuous, and which of these claims are actually anti-blackness.
Claim 1: People calling your hair nappy or nappy looking even though you’ve spent time on it
Well, this isn’t racist unless they are saying that all black people (or PoC if you prefer) have hair like that and that it all looks nappy (which is honestly something I’ve never heard anyone let alone any white person say). IF they’re just talking about your hair, then they are being jerks and insulting you. But they aren’t insulting your race. It doesn’t matter if you have racially stereotypical hair, youy are the target of the insult- not your entire race. When someone says I have a Jew-fro (as has happened like once in my life when my hair was really, really long) they aren’t insulting my religion (or my ethnicity if you subscribe to the belief of ethnic Judaism). They are insulting my hair.
Claim 2: Getting too much sun is code for “don’t get too dark”
On what planet is this remotely the case? I can think of at least three different explanations before race becomes remotely an issue. This comment could be directed at not exposing oneself to skin cancer causing ultraviolet radiation, attempting to avoid heatstroke or heat exhaustion due to overexposure to excessively high temperatures (such as the sun on a very hot day at the beach, or during some kind of physical labor), or simply not wanting to get sunburned as it can be painful and irritating to deal with. That’s what I think of when someone (regardless of race) says “don’t get too much sun”. It has nothing to do with getting too dark. It seems like you’re injecting race (and thus racism here) where it’s really not necessary.
Claim 3: Telling your children to stay out of the sun “or they’ll burn and become less attractive”
You know, this might not necessarily refer to race (if someone actually said “burn and become less attractive” again, that’s not what immediately springs to mind when someone says to stay out of the sun). Skin cancer makes people a lot less attractive (objectively speaking) as well. And children are especially vulnerable to skin cancer-causing sunburns. So, again I really don’t see a racial issue here. Could it be one? Sure, if someone explicitly mentions PoC or black people, etc. But is it inherently? Not in the slightest. Again, it seems like you’re making this about race when it doesn’t have to be about race.
Claim 4: Saying some black people are beautiful
Well, this is a true statement. Do you think all black people are beautiful? What about all white people? I’m sure you’ve seen some less-than attractive examples of both. Not everyone gets to be pretty. And that’s okay. I’m sure that those people who aren’t physically as attractive as others have other inherent values- like intelligence, empathy, kindness, etc. They are probably good people, and they might have intensely beautiful souls. But when someone makes that statement they are referring to physical attractiveness. And that’s an objectively true statement. Plus by using your logic, if you don’t find all Latino men attractive you are anti-Latino, if you don’t find all Asian men attractive you are anti-Asian, etc. And that’s utter nonsense. Again, can this sentence be racist? Sure, if someone says that all or most of another race are attractive but only some black people are. But is this statement inherently racist? Nope. Not in the least. And quit it with the “we all know who the some are” tripe. Because we don’t. Society might dictate something, but people have their own individual beauty standards. Some of the women my friends find immensely attractive barely register in my book, and some of the girls I’ve dated and thought were beautiful were merely “cute” to them. Personal preference is okay, and just because someone doesn’t find you attractive doesn’t make them racist.
Claim 5: Telling people not to touch your hair and they respond with “it won’t mess it up/ it will look the same”.
Again, I’ve never heard anyone say this ever. Generally it’s more along the lines of “can I touch your hair” (which is already a weird question, but then again I’m not a girl) “No, don’t touch my hair” “okay I won’t touch your hair”. So it sounds like these people are just being needlessly insulting, and I’m sorry about that. But again, they aren’t insulting your race’s hair. They are insulting your hair. Just because your hair might be a racial characteristic doesn’t mean they are insulting your race’s hair. If someone says “Josh Luberda has a big nose” and Josh Luberda happens to be Jewish, they are not insulting all Jews. They are insulting Josh Luberda and Josh Luberda alone. This distinction is incredibly important.
Claim 6: Asking a dark skinned person “why do you even tan”
This claim has a bit more of a basis in reality. I can easily see how that statement can be construed as racist (although I don’t see how it’s anti-black. It seems like the question doesn’t assume that black people aren’t good enough for tanning but rather that they don’t need to tan). But it doesn’t have to be due to malevolence. It could be due to ignorance. Hanlon’s razor applies here: “never attribute to malice what can otherwise be explained by ignorance”. And there’s a good chance a person asking this question who sees tanning as a way to get “darker” (as in less pasty-white) might be ignorant of why a person who is already “dark” (as in not pasty-white) might want to tan. So you might be right here, but you might also be quite mistaken. The question is insensitive, but it’s not necessarily racist or anti-black.
Claim 7: Calling anything with a black lead “Hood” or “Ghetto” production
This is incredibly racist and bigoted. And I’ve had the fortune of never having heard it said, but if it is said then the people who say it should be ashamed of themselves. Because they are judging the worth of a production and of an individual solely on the individual’s race. Now, if it happens to be an inner-city or a lower-class production, the charge goes down from racism to insensitivity. But that seems like a minor quibble. I agree with this claim. This represents individual racism and anti-blackness.
Claim 8: Always referring to the darker person as aggressive
Unless you’re referring to some sort of pre-19th Century law code, I have no idea what in the world you are talking about here. Some clarification if you please? If you’re speaking generally then this is completely and utterly false. Most people are likely to regard the more aggressive individual (through action as opposed to race) as the most aggressive regardless of race. I don’t understand what you’re trying to say here, so let’s consider this one “unresolved”.
Claim 9: Asking for the name of a dance created and developed by black people, watching the dance, and not wanting to participate because it “looks stupid”.
This is another time where the remark is insensitive as opposed to racist. Unless the person says “I would never C-Walk because it was made by black people and therefore it looks stupid because black people are stupid” this isn’t inherently insulting a race. It’s insulting a dance. I don’t like Kabuki theater. I do enjoy regular theater. If someone asked me to go to a Kabuki theater show with them I might very well refuse because I don’t like Kabuki theater. That does not make me racist toward Asian cultures. It just means I don’t like Kabuki theater. If your issue is that these people displayed an interest and then did nit follow through, then just stop showing people these dances unless you want to. No one is forcing you to interact with or demonstrate these dances for these people. If they want to be inconsiderate jerks about it, tell them to google it themselves. But not wanting to participate in a dance because you don’t like the dance and think it looks “stupid” isn’t racist. It’s not a very nice thing to say, but they are insulting the dance and not your race.
Claim 10: Saying something isn’t a big deal to a black person to whom it clearly is both race-related and a big deal.
This is utter nonsense,and I think you know that. Just because you don’t like something as a black person, and make it related to your race doesn’t make it actually racist. There is your truth (i.e. the truth of your feelings, your experiences, and what you believe) and the objective truth (i.e. the facts of the situation in question, details that you might not be fully aware of, etc.). Sometimes these two truths might align, but just because you believe something is true does not make it objectively true. Just because I want to make the fact that my teacher gave me a bad grade on a test about my religion does not make it about my religion. This is nonsense logic and taking it to its logical conclusion if a person believes that stealing isn’t wrong, it’s fine if they rob a bank. If someone thinks “they were going to rape me if I didn’t consent” then they were raped. Do you see how nonsensical this is? It’s ridiculous and you should be ashamed for using an argument like this. For shame.
Claim 11: Saying an afro-ethnic or afro-centric work is too complicated and refusing to perform it at a venue
Well, that depends on the venue. If we’re talking a hypothetical venue with infinite money, infinite people, and a high demand for any production whatsoever, then sure it’s racist. But most venues don’t work like that. If a play has too many characters, too many changing sets, too many confusing plot points, not enough public interest (which is the only thing that could remotely relate to race here), too high a production cost (because of all of these things), too many costume changes, a confusing or uninteresting plot, etc. then a venue might be justified in refusing something because it is “too complicated” (which would be a nice way of referring to the issues in question) regardless of the subject matter and the race of the author or the races of the characters. IF the play deals with a controversial issue and/or takes a controversial stance on something (i.e. “Fuck Paris- The Musical”) then a venue can also be justified in refusing the production because it is too complicated. Unless the venue specifically says they are refusing the play because it is “black and therefore too complicated” or “too complicated because it’s too black” then chances are there were other considerations at hand than just race. Also, even if a venue is fine with performing an afro-centric or afro-ethnic work, if there is another work (say an Asian one for sake of argument) that has more public interest and is easier to perform they might still reject the afro-centric or afro-ethnic one due to the greater public demand for the Asian work. So, while this certainly can be due to racism it most certainly not inherently due to any racism or anti-blackness.
Claim 13: Feeling like you need to state that you don’t find African/ Dark skinned people attractive
Sure, this can most certainly be racist if it comes out-of-left-field. If an attractive black woman walks by and someone says “wow that is a very attractive woman, but she is black and therefore I do not find her to be attractive in the slightest. If she was white I’d totally hit that, but since she’s black…” (or something to that effect). But if someone says “wow that’s an attractive woman” and another person says “eh, I don’t really find black women that attractive, but if you like her then go talk to her” (or something to that effect) then it’s not racist. It’s just personal preference. Just because someone doesn’t find black women attractive doesn’t mean they think black women are inferior to white women (or Asian women, Latinas, etc.) in every way- it just means that they do not find black women sexually attractive. They can still find black women strong, capable, independent, confident, intelligent, etc. Heck, they can even find them objectively attractive (i.e. good-looking in the same way a straight man can find other men good-looking). They just do not have a sexual pull toward the black woman in question. So unless you’re making the argument that the only value people (or races have) is physical attractiveness, then this sort of personal preference is not necessarily racist. Also, let’s take this same logic and apply it to other races. Are you racist against Asians because you would never date an Asian man? Are black women that don’t like white guys racist (or at least prejudiced) towards white people because they won’t date them? I doubt you’d say that, but it’s literally the same situation just with other races. Also cut it out with the “no one cares about that” accusation. You just included this on a list of “anti-blackness”. Therefore you care. Therefore your statement is incorrect and comes off as angry, bitter and whiny. Not to mention unnecessary.
Claim 14: Using the excuse of preference to explain an “aversion to darker folk”
Do… Do you understand how sexual attraction works? There are some things that are controlled by people (i.e. I want a girl who has similar values to me as I think that will make a happier relationship) and some things that are very much not in the individual’s control (i.e. I like men, I like women, I like both, etc.). Generally who you are physically attracted to is very much not a choice (as if it was conversion therapy would work and plenty of political lesbians would be a heck of a lot happier) and thus the inverse of that statement is also true: people do not control who they are not attracted to either. However, there is a pretty big caveat to this issue: If someone finds the individual in question sexually attractive but will not pursue him or her because of race. In this case, the white man in question does find the black woman sexually attractive, and will not date her (or marry her, or commit to her) solely because she is black. If she was white, he would absolutely do all of those things, but because she is black and solely because she is black (i.e. there is no attraction disconnect) he will not. That’s literally judging a person’s worth (to you) solely on their skin color (as attractiveness doesn’t play a role seeing as he finds her attractive) and is thus racist by definition. So while you might have a point in that caveat,m I really don’t think that particular situation is all that common to confirm this claim. So, this also isn’t generally racist or anti-black. Although again, it can be insensitive.
Claim 15: Yelling out “stop talking about race, it’s not always about race”
Well, it’s not. At least not objectively speaking. If you want to make everything about race, then go right ahead. But that doesn’t make you right. And it doesn’t mean that you have a point. Sorry. But that’s the truth. Like I said back in claim 10, just because you feel something is the truth (and therefore it’s your truth) doesn’t make it the truth. Your feelings are not any more important than anyone else’s. You are not the Ruler of the Universe that gets to decree what is or is not racist and anti-black. Sorry. And this logic is just as repulsive as it was in claim 10. Because it’s the same claim. Read that if you want a rebuttal.
Claim 16: Saying all ____ (lives, peoples, issues) matter after a black person airs a grievance
Well, this depends on how this is done and what the person saying all lives matter is responding to. If a black individual says something along the lines of “police violence against black people must be stopped!” and someone else responds with “police violence in general must be stopped; it’s not just a black problem” then I don’t see how that’s inherently racist or anti-black. It’s acknowledging that the black individual’s claim is correct regarding his or her race, and just adding other victim groups onto said claim. Victimization isn’t a zero-sum game you know. Just because you admit that the Sinti and the mentally ill were also victimized during the Holocaust does not make the atrocities the Jews suffered any less horrific. Now on the other hand, if someone says something along the lines of “black people are over-targeted for traffic stops despite never having a record, and not being suspicious. This is a problem and must be stopped! Black lives matter!” and another person responds with “actually all lives matter” you might have a point. Not the best point, and not a definite on by any stretch of the imagination, but a point nonetheless. Because in this second example, “all lives matter” is used to invalidate the victimization of black people as opposed to add to the victimization of black people. But I would just go with “snarky and insensitive” as opposed to racist and anti-black myself. But, you may disagree. However, the phrase “all lives matter” is not inherently racist or anti-black: Unless black people are explicitly or implicitly excluded from the “all”.
Claim 17: calling the natural hair movement/ black people loving themselves a fad that will pass
I’ve never heard this either. Most people I know don’t really give a darn about either of these two movements. If the people in the movements are happy, then good for them. If they aren’t well then hopefully they become happy sooner or later. However saying that a fashion or social movement isn’t going to last is not racist. When people were saying that Occupy Wall Street was doomed to fail, they weren’t being racist or sexist unless they explicitly mentioned race or sex in their response (i.e. Occupy Wall Street will fail because they have too many women/ black people in positions of power). So unless the people saying these things are saying they will fail because black people are involved then these criticisms are criticisms of the movements themselves as opposed to the races involved in the movements.
So, now that I’m done with all 17 of your claims @onyxslaughterhaus, let’s tally up how many are confirmed, plausible (i.e. not just one highly specific exmaple where it could be the case) and basically disproven:
Plausible: 3 (claims 6,14,16)
Disproven: 12 (claims 1,2,3,4,5,9,10,11,12,13,15,17)
So, even if I’m nice and give you all the plausible claims and the unresolved one (even though it sounds utterly ridiculous) that’s still only 4/17 examples of anti-blackness. Percentage-wise that’s about 23.5% which is less than a fourth of your claims and a failing grade in any school system. And there is no curve on this test. Sorry. Try again next time.
dailybridgerton
tangentwithtanner
titsay
prguitarman
blakekathryn
