If the list prefers, I will direct any future comments on this topic to the individual/s involved. > Carol said: > > Racism, after all, is an attitude; it is not in > > the ear of the beholder. > > Liza said: > That is incorrect. > > If you call me: > > "You Black *&%**^!!!!" > > Then I don't care what you THINK your intentions are Are you saying that someone can have intentions of which they are unaware? You've got to be kidding. > - your words are racist. > Racism is, in fact, "in the ear of the beholder." You may have an arguable point in some cases, but because your example is so extreme, it certainly isn't one of those cases. It is ridiculously unlikely that anyone could say "You Black *&%^!!!" without having any intention or expectation of offending anyone! :D So let's look instead at an example that's useful. What if someone were to say, "Generally, Blacks are better athletes than Whites"? Depending on one's definitions of the terms involved, this could be true, false, or untestable. Whichever way, someone could easily get offended. Some people might just look at it as a statistics problem and think no more of it, but people of any color might get offended because it isn't politically correct today to even make such statments, no matter what you base them on. Whites might be offended because it makes them look genetically inferior. Blacks might be offended because some people equate better athletic ability with being more animal-like. Those who are neither Black nor White might get offended because they feel their group has been ignored! The possibilities are almost endless. So this statement could be (at the least) non-racist and non-PC, non-racist and PC, racist against Whites, or racist against Blacks, depending on the listener. If you believe that response is the determiner of racism, the speaker of that statement is a non-racist racist! :D So... To be a racist according to your definition, do I have to offend a certain percentage of a population, or is a single individual enough? How do you deal with differences of opinion within a racial community? Some Blacks are offended by Malcom X. Others are not. Some Whites are offended by Malcom X. Others are not. Is he a racist or not? > The attitude you've expressed above is itself racist, in its ignorance. I disagree. Racism, in a nutshell, is the belief that races are intrinsically better or worse than other races (assuming that the concept of race is valid to start with). The racist usually, but not necessarily, believes that the superior race is his or her own race. If I think that one race is better than another, I'm a racist. Doesn't matter whether I'm black, white, purple or green. It doesn't matter whether I have power or not. It doesn't matter whether my knowledge of the subject at hand is encyclopedic or non-existent. It doesn't matter which way the winds of public opinion are blowing. While I would agree that racists are usually ignorant people, it does not follow that all ignorance is a sign of racism. > You said: > > To say that someone who does not hold racist > > beliefs is a racist just because their words have offended someone... > > Ah! Look what bubbles up when the pot is stirred! That phrase worked perfectly well with the rest of its sentence. What was your point in chopping it up like that? And what are you so pleased about? > You may THINK that you "do not hold racist beliefs." But if you > offend someone with your words - if you make racist statements - > then you do, indeed, hold racist beliefs - that you yourself aren't > even aware of! I can see how that *can* happen, but your sweeping generalizations and black & white thinking do nothing to further your position. It's in those grey areas where the tough questions lie and where real thinking has to be done, Liza. Life isn't as one-dimensional as you seem to want it to be. You have probably offended scores of people in your day. Does this mean you're a racist? By your definition, we're probably ALL racists, making the term useless. Carol