Who said that's all black women are good for? That is a wild/extreme conclusion to jump to.
I don't see the difference between viewing things through a racially distorted lens due to your own prejudices or assumptions and racism. In fact, that's kind of how I define a racist person.
Then your grandma is a racist. Because she is asking inappropriate questions based solely off of her racially distored lens of assuming black women don't have light babies based on her own assumptions from being surrounded by same race families. There, ends fucking meat.
No. It's not racist to not imagine an interracial family. It is racist to assign a lesser worth/standing to a family because it is interracial.
Isn't this a classic case of racial micro-aggression? The white woman assumes that Auberge is not a mother like her. She assumes a black woman is there to help the white children. I mean, being a nanny is not a bad thing - I was one - but her assumption puts Auberge in the lesser position.
I think Miso is right; "Why do you ask?" is a polite way to point out that the person asking this question should be embarrassed for asking it.
People talk all the damn time on this board about if things are or are not racist and the idea of somebody being racially ignorant/insensitive but not racist has been brought up multiple times. Where the fuck have you been?
I have been the one saying it was ignorant but might not be racist in this post. Possibly not racist because she might not have meant it in terms of an insult or put down.
Nugget, I don't want to keep upsetting you, so I'm going to let this drop. I believe I am understanding what you are saying, but we differ on two points:
I would include behavior you typically would clarify as not being racist but having racial undertones into my definition of racism; and
I also think that it isn't fair to specify that the comment absolutely has racial undertones when the mother is black and the child is white, but another meaning altogether when the situation is reversed. My position from the beginning is that if the statement could mean something not related to race in one situation, it could also have a similar, non-racially-motivated meaning even when the mother is black and the child is white.
You disagree with this, and I get that. As I said, can we just agree it was shitty and move on?
Post by rupertpenny on Oct 20, 2014 21:43:53 GMT -5
These kinds of threads always get hung up on people arguing about whether one specific individual is racist which is dumb, this lady could have a shrine to Hitler in her closet or she could just have verbal diarhea. The point is that American society is racist, it is built on racial steroptypes and assumptions. This woman's worldview is built on institutional racism. That's why she assumes a black lady with white kids is the nanny. Not because she hates black people personally, but because "domestic help" is one of the few roles traditionally alloted to black women in our socity. She probably isn't doing this on purpose, and it isn't even her fault necessarily (although she would do well to keep her mouth shut more often), it just is.
Isn't this a classic case of racial micro-aggression? The white woman assumes that Auberge is not a mother like her. She assumes a black woman is there to help the white children. I mean, being a nanny is not a bad thing - I was one - but her assumption puts Auberge in the lesser position.
I think Miso is right; "Why do you ask?" is a polite way to point out that the person asking this question should be embarrassed for asking it.
nannies are lesser?
Well, a nanny works for a parent. She follows their rules; she can be fired. She (or he) is not technically a servant but it's the same connotation. Given our history, for a black or brown person it's an insulting assumption.
I would go with probably racist. I get this a lot. And when we travel all over the country.
People try to tell me that I must get this question all the time because I look young. I'm pretty sure that you can see the '3 kids under 5' in my face though.
When I respond that they are mind I usually get some variation of 'oh...they have your nose/dimples' or 'their dad must be blonde'. I also get 'do they have the same father?' a lot because they all have different-ish coloring.
BTW You are gorgeous and your kids are super cute!
Just a quick anecdote for Captain Serious; it can/does happen when the races of parent/child are reversed...and it is still racist.
I am clearly darker skinned with lighter skinned kids and I get asked if I'm the nanny.
My dad is clearly white/blue eyed and when I was out with him without my mother, we would get the 'are you adopted?' bit.
People are dumbfounded when they ask if my daughter gets her bright red turned blonde hair from my husband, and I tell them it's actually from my side.
I should not try this but I just don't know when to say when.
It is racist because the woman chose "nanny" instead of "family friend" or "neighbor" or whatever other question one might ask. She went right from the observation they have different skin colors to assuming the OP would only have a whire baby because she is staff. The assumptions about the baby not being hers becuse they have different skin color is not necessarily racist, though it might be. The assumption that she is the staff- and not the mothers peer- is what's racist.
It is not racist when asked of a white mom and a whire baby because race isn't an issue there. But it is ageist. If age is why they are making that assumption.
This is so clear in my own head. I don't understand how captain serious can't understand it.
Post by irishbride2 on Oct 21, 2014 4:55:32 GMT -5
I've had this question asked of me multiple times, and all 4 of us are whiter than white.
But one of my kids is blond and blue eyed and the other is brown and brown eyed.So apparently this confuses people. I've also had multiple people ask me if my kids have different fathers.
eta: This is not to argue that it wasn't racist. It very well could have been. I do not know.
Post by lyssbobiss, Command, B613 on Oct 21, 2014 5:56:25 GMT -5
Racist. Racist as fuck. And y'all who think it isn't are coming across naive and trying too hard to be PC. This lady thought OP was The Help. Full stop.
"This prick is asking for someone here to bring him to task Somebody give me some dirt on this vacuous mass so we can at last unmask him I'll pull the trigger on it, someone load the gun and cock it While we were all watching, he got Washington in his pocket."
I was once asked if my kids had different fathers because my daughter is pale with blonde hair and blue eyed and my son is olive toned with brown hair and brown eyes. They are practically identical though. Same faces and everything.
I should not try this but I just don't know when to say when.
It is racist because the woman chose "nanny" instead of "family friend" or "neighbor" or whatever other question one might ask. She went right from the observation they have different skin colors to assuming the OP would only have a whire baby because she is staff. The assumptions about the baby not being hers becuse they have different skin color is not necessarily racist, though it might be. The assumption that she is the staff- and not the mothers peer- is what's racist.
It is not racist when asked of a white mom and a whire baby because race isn't an issue there. But it is ageist. If age is why they are making that assumption.
This is so clear in my own head. I don't understand how captain serious can't understand it.
Elle, I see your point, and conceded that last night. What do you think about if a white mom is asked if she is a black child's many? Racist? Can't be racist because she is white? This is where I lose it.
If it is not racist when the mom is white and the baby is black, then there is a chance that it wasn't coming from a racist intention when the skin tones are reversed.
A comment cannot be determined to be racist in a vacuum of the speakers intent/feelings. If the speaker did not believe that the only way a black mother could have a white child is by being the many, but asked because of a different reason, then even a question that could be racist in another situation is not racist in that utterance.
This has caused in long enough, so i will now do my best to let it drop.
I should not try this but I just don't know when to say when.
It is racist because the woman chose "nanny" instead of "family friend" or "neighbor" or whatever other question one might ask. She went right from the observation they have different skin colors to assuming the OP would only have a whire baby because she is staff. The assumptions about the baby not being hers becuse they have different skin color is not necessarily racist, though it might be. The assumption that she is the staff- and not the mothers peer- is what's racist.
It is not racist when asked of a white mom and a whire baby because race isn't an issue there. But it is ageist. If age is why they are making that assumption.
This is so clear in my own head. I don't understand how captain serious can't understand it.
Elle, I see your point, and conceded that last night. What do you think about if a white mom is asked if she is a black child's many? Racist? Can't be racist because she is white? This is where I lose it.
If it is not racist when the mom is white and the baby is black, then there is a chance that it wasn't coming from a racist intention when the skin tones are reversed.
A comment cannot be determined to be racist in a vacuum of the speakers intent/feelings. If the speaker did not believe that the only way a black mother could have a white child is by being the many, but asked because of a different reason, then even a question that could be racist in another situation is not racist in that utterance.
This has caused in long enough, so i will now do my best to let it drop.
I am posting and running off to work so I apologize for that.
I think the bolded part above is just not true. I have heard NUMEROUS racist or antisemitic remarks made, that could not have been interpreted as anything else. When I have called the people out on the remark, they say something like "Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't mean anything bad by that." But it really is still racist.
Now, a Native American I was talking to last week used the phrase "jew me down" and I honestly think in that case he was not intending to be antisemitic, he was older and had heard the expression a lot and hadn't really thought about what it really means or where it came from so I get what you are saying in a way that it is contextual.
But I am thinking of someone I went to college with and the MANY offensive things she said and they were racist. They just were. But she'd smile sweetly and say she hadn't meant any harm as though that excused it and I just don't think it does.
I should not try this but I just don't know when to say when.
It is racist because the woman chose "nanny" instead of "family friend" or "neighbor" or whatever other question one might ask. She went right from the observation they have different skin colors to assuming the OP would only have a whire baby because she is staff. The assumptions about the baby not being hers becuse they have different skin color is not necessarily racist, though it might be. The assumption that she is the staff- and not the mothers peer- is what's racist.
It is not racist when asked of a white mom and a whire baby because race isn't an issue there. But it is ageist. If age is why they are making that assumption.
This is so clear in my own head. I don't understand how captain serious can't understand it.
Elle, I see your point, and conceded that last night. What do you think about if a white mom is asked if she is a black child's many? Racist? Can't be racist because she is white? This is where I lose it.
If it is not racist when the mom is white and the baby is black, then there is a chance that it wasn't coming from a racist intention when the skin tones are reversed.
A comment cannot be determined to be racist in a vacuum of the speakers intent/feelings. If the speaker did not believe that the only way a black mother could have a white child is by being the many, but asked because of a different reason, then even a question that could be racist in another situation is not racist in that utterance.
This has caused in long enough, so i will now do my best to let it drop.
Racist. Racist as fuck. And y'all who think it isn't are coming across naive and trying too hard to be PC. This lady thought OP was The Help. Full stop.
Nugget, I don't want to keep upsetting you, so I'm going to let this drop. I believe I am understanding what you are saying, but we differ on two points:
I would include behavior you typically would clarify as not being racist but having racial undertones into my definition of racism; and
I also think that it isn't fair to specify that the comment absolutely has racial undertones when the mother is black and the child is white, but another meaning altogether when the situation is reversed. My position from the beginning is that if the statement could mean something not related to race in one situation, it could also have a similar, non-racially-motivated meaning even when the mother is black and the child is white.
You disagree with this, and I get that. As I said, can we just agree it was shitty and move on?
JFC, Captain.. NO ONE is going to agree with you. Try to draw some common sense conclusions from that.
If you must reply to this, please keep it under a paragraph. TIA.
Elle, I see your point, and conceded that last night. What do you think about if a white mom is asked if she is a black child's many? Racist? Can't be racist because she is white? This is where I lose it.
If it is not racist when the mom is white and the baby is black, then there is a chance that it wasn't coming from a racist intention when the skin tones are reversed.
A comment cannot be determined to be racist in a vacuum of the speakers intent and feelings.
If somebody makes a racist joke or calls somebody a slur or makes a raciat remark I don't need to know what their personal fucking feelings are to know it's still racist. You can think it's a great compliment but saying I am well spoken for a black person is still fucking racist. Fuck your feelings.
I agree.
But this wasn't a joke or slur. In fact, it was said that if it was a white mother with a black kid, it could have been a *compliment*, because it could have been a comment on youth. I just don't see how that all has to be thrown out the minute the skin tones are reversed.
I have repeatedly said it COULD have been racist. I have also said that we just don't know if it was racist, because we don't know the reason it was said. How can you all be so certain that there is no possible chance it was asked because she looks young, or because the speaker had some other reason for thinking that other than black woman with white kids is the help? I think you are responding to this with your own set of preconceived notions.
And I'm going to take it one step further and say that when you have MULTIPLE BLACK MOTHERS in here, talking about how thr same thing happened to them and yeah, it felt pretty racist, and you continue to fucking argue about how it really wasn't racist because intents and feelings and Spanish and your grandma you are discounting those experiences. You have NO RIGHT to tell people if they should feel something was racially motivated or racist. The women on this board are smart and generally not given to knee jerk reactions when it comes to racial issues so we are perfectly capable of deciding on our goddamn own if something is racist or prejudiced or not.
I would argue that the OP wasn't sure it was racist herself. It felt off, the way it would to anyone, but she came here to see how others would react.
If somebody makes a racist joke or calls somebody a slur or makes a raciat remark I don't need to know what their personal fucking feelings are to know it's still racist. You can think it's a great compliment but saying I am well spoken for a black person is still fucking racist. Fuck your feelings.
I agree.
But this wasn't a joke or slur. In fact, it was said that if it was a white mother with a black kid, it could have been a *compliment*, because it could have been a comment on youth. I just don't see how that all has to be thrown out the minute the skin tones are reversed.
I have repeatedly said it COULD have been racist. I have also said that we just don't know if it was racist, because we don't know the reason it was said. How can you all be so certain that there is no possible chance it was asked because she looks tong, or because the speaker had some other reason for thinking that other than black woman with white kids is the help? I think you are responding to this with your own set of preconceived notions.
Post by Captain Serious on Oct 21, 2014 8:11:18 GMT -5
I'm okay if no one agrees. I have many opinions and views that don't align with the prevailing views of the board. I am only still posting because specific things are being brought up to which I am responding and I am clarifying when posters are attributing thoughts and feelings to me which aren't mine.
If somebody makes a racist joke or calls somebody a slur or makes a raciat remark I don't need to know what their personal fucking feelings are to know it's still racist. You can think it's a great compliment but saying I am well spoken for a black person is still fucking racist. Fuck your feelings.
I agree.
But this wasn't a joke or slur. In fact, it was said that if it was a white mother with a black kid, it could have been a *compliment*, because it could have been a comment on youth. I just don't see how that all has to be thrown out the minute the skin tones are reversed.
I have repeatedly said it COULD have been racist. I have also said that we just don't know if it was racist, because we don't know the reason it was said. How can you all be so certain that there is no possible chance it was asked because she looks tong, or because the speaker had some other reason for thinking that other than black woman with white kids is the help? I think you are responding to this with your own set of preconceived notions.
OMG the same statement can different things if it's said to a black person vs a white person. That is the whole point of racism.
But this wasn't a joke or slur. In fact, it was said that if it was a white mother with a black kid, it could have been a *compliment*, because it could have been a comment on youth. I just don't see how that all has to be thrown out the minute the skin tones are reversed.
I have repeatedly said it COULD have been racist. I have also said that we just don't know if it was racist, because we don't know the reason it was said. How can you all be so certain that there is no possible chance it was asked because she looks tong, or because the speaker had some other reason for thinking that other than black woman with white kids is the help? I think you are responding to this with your own set of preconceived notions.
OMG the same statement can different things if it's said to a black person vs a white person. That is the whole point of racism.
Yes, it can. But it doesn't have to, in all situations, immediately transform.
I'm okay if no one agrees. I have many opinions and views that don't align with the prevailing views of the board. I am only still posting because specific things are being brought up to which I am responding and I am clarifying when posters are attributing thoughts and feelings to me which aren't mine.