[mibbiting]

"and I only included subjects who appeared to be a white man"

Ah yes of course - racism can only be carried out by white men after all.

What a pile of rubbish. If you take offense at words, things are going to get progressively worse for you as more and more automated bots enter the scene.

The answer of course, is for people to stop taking offense.

Do these people get offended at spam emails suggesting they need viagra or a fuckbuddy? What's the point?

[inimino]

> racism can only be carried out by white men after all

...because he wanted to test the in-group out-group effect. Furthermore given the metric he was using...

Honestly, did you even read the article?

[Chris2048]

Can you expand on "given the metric he was using"?

[inimino]

He measured use of a particular ethnic slur, the interpretation of which can vary depending on who is using it.

[mibbiting]

eg racism can only be performed by white people.

[Chris2048]

Not so much that, as much as the only kind of racism being investigated was that of white people.

[mibbiting]

Which highlights how idiotic it all is.

If a statement is absolutely fine if the person saying it is black, but absolutely offensive and racist if the person saying it is white, then it's the person taking offense who is the racist one...

[inimino]

1) No.

2) No.

[cooper12]

They never claimed such a thing, only that a specific race had to be chosen for the experiment to have a comparison. Also, really funny how you tell people to stop taking offense at words while simultaneously doing that exactly. By your own logic, why would you get offended if someone said only white men could be racist? They're only words after all.

[mibbiting]

I'm not offended - I've never been offended. I'm just calling it out as bullshit.

[calibraxis]

> Ah yes of course - racism can only be carried out by white men after all.

No one said that. Just that racism is an oppression where whites are the top caste. Blacks can be racist against blacks too, for example internalized racism.

However, blacks being racist against whites is an odd statement, like homeless people being classist against the rich. Race is pseudoscientific classification of people to justify entire economic systems like slavery, and still lives on like awful backwards compatibility.

> Do these people get offended at spam emails suggesting they need viagra or a fuckbuddy?

Companies like twitter are far more aggressive at fighting spam than physical threats. To the point where people simply reported abusers as spammers at one point. That's why no one bought them.

Oops. Maybe they should've been less arrogant to their embattled userbase; so-called "social justice warriors" turned out to be normal people just trying to help them make money. What happens social media companies refuse to learn things like sociology. http://www.businessinsider.com/disney-twitter-acquisition-tr...

[snovv_crash]

This idea that there is a single, global caste system which is applicable in all situations makes me very uneasy. For example, a white person being beaten up for going into a black gang area I feel would be racism, because that is a space where black people are at the top of the pyramid. A male stay-at-home dad being scorned by female counterparts would be an example of female-to-male sexism, because that is an aspect of society where women are considered to be superior.

The trick is understanding who holds the power in the situation.

[vectorpush]

> However, Blacks being racist against whites is an odd statement, like homeless people being classist against the rich.

I get what you're saying, but this just isn't a very pragmatic perspective. It's clear that white people have major hegemonic advantages over minority groups, but at the end of the day, the left (of which I am a part) needs to acknowledge and reject the damaging effect this kind of rhetoric has on racial discourse. As an extreme example, a statement like "fuck white people", is clearly racist regardless of who is saying it. It is difficult to fight racism if we give casual observers ammo to reject the left as hypocrites. This doesn't mean we have to pretend that the impact of racism affects all groups equally, but in order to see progress we must condemn hateful speech in all forms instead of dismissing it just because the speaker hails from a disadvantaged group.

[eveningcoffee]

However, blacks being racist against whites is an odd statement, like homeless people being classist against the rich.

And it indeed would be classist. You are neglecting this because you think that homeless people can not have any influence.

But consider this, group of homeless people ambush and attack people they consider rich. Would you still think that it is acceptable?

If we want to root out some behaviour then we can not tolerate it in any form.

[pekk]

How often is it happening that the rich are being ambushed by groups of resentful homeless people? Is this a significant and recurring problem in your country that existing policing is failing to address?