# Colorblind Ideology is a Form of Racism



## Big Don (Jul 31, 2013)

[h=1]Colorblind Ideology is a Form of Racism[/h]     
    	   	       A colorblind approach allows us to deny uncomfortable cultural differences.   	
   	 	        Published on December 27, 2011 by Monnica T. Williams, Ph.D. Psychology Today EXCERPT:

[h=2]What is racial colorblindness?[/h]Racial issues are often uncomfortable to discuss and rife with stress  and controversy. Many ideas have been advanced to address this sore  spot in the American psyche. Currently, the most pervasive approach is  known as _colorblindness_. Colorblindness is the racial ideology that posits the best way to end discrimination is by treating individuals as equally as possible, without regard to race, culture, or ethnicity.

At  its face value, colorblindness seems like a good thing  really taking  MLK seriously on his call to judge people on the content of their  character rather than the color of their skin. It focuses on  commonalities between people, such as their shared humanity.

However, colorblindness alone is not sufficient to heal racial wounds  on a national or personal level. It is only a half-measure that in the  end operates as a form of racism.

[h=2]Problems with the colorblind approach[/h]Racism?  Strong words, yes, but let's look the issue straight in its partially  unseeing eye. In a colorblind society, White people, who are unlikely to  experience disadvantages due to race, can effectively ignore racism in  American life, justify the current social order, and feel more  comfortable with their relatively privileged standing in society  (Fryberg, 2010). Most minorities, however, who regularly encounter  difficulties due to race, experience colorblind ideologies quite  differently. Colorblindness creates a society that denies their negative  racial experiences, rejects their cultural heritage, and invalidates  their unique perspectives.

Let's break it down into simple terms:  Color-Blind = "People of color  we don't see you (at least not that bad  colored' part)." As a person of color, I like who I am, and I don't  want any aspect of that to be unseen or invisible. The need for  colorblindness implies there is something shameful about the way God  made me and the culture I was born into that we shouldn't talk about.  Thus, colorblindness has helped make race into a taboo topic that polite  people cannot openly discuss. And if you can't talk about it, you can't  understand it, much less fix the racial problems that plague our  society.
END EXCERPT
The proper netspeak term for this is OFFS.


> At  its face value, colorblindness seems like a good thing  really taking  MLK seriously on his call to judge people on the content of their  character rather than the color of their skin.


 Yeah, because treating people as individuals is wrong, each individual person must ONLY be treated as representative of a group, be it racial, nationality, sex, etc... 





> It focuses on  commonalities between people, such as their shared humanity.
> 
> However, colorblindness alone is not sufficient to heal racial wounds  on a national or personal level. It is only a half-measure that in the  end operates as a form of racism.


It is not my responsibility to heal anyone's wounds, unless I personally caused them. Sorry, being born in the 1970's I never owned slaves, oppressed Chinese railroad workers, hung a "No Irish" sign, etc. Get over yourselves. MTFU. The world would be so much better without those a holes who make up the grievance industry and their followers who go through life looking for reasons to be offended. 
This is the kind of fuzzy headed liberal "thinking" that leads to being eaten, and the stupidest goddamn thing I have read in years, and I read Interview with the Vampire.


----------



## arnisador (Aug 1, 2013)

Big Don said:


> It is not my responsibility to heal anyone's wounds, unless I personally caused them. Sorry, being born in the 1970's I never owned slaves, oppressed Chinese railroad workers, hung a "No Irish" sign, etc. Get over yourselves. MTFU.



If you didn't cause the problems, they don't exist?



> The world would be so much better without those a holes who make up the grievance industry and their followers who go through life looking for reasons to be offended.



There are legitimate grievances. You mention never owning slaves, but the Civil Rights Act was passed within my lifetime. And that didn't end all problems.


----------



## granfire (Aug 1, 2013)

So basically, the article suggests it's unfair to deny people their chip on their shoulder....

Interesting perspective.


----------



## Tgace (Aug 1, 2013)

arnisador said:


> If you didn't cause the problems, they don't exist?



He didn't say that..he said it's not his responsibility to "heal their wounds". And I have to agree. Why should I, simply due to the color of my skin, have to...for example...pay for "reparations" that some people want? If I was a direct descendant of a slave owner I would still argue that it's unfair and un-American to be expected to pay for the "sins of my father". Even more so for someone like me who had the bulk of my Ancestory immigrate into the this country after the Civil War.


----------



## Big Don (Aug 1, 2013)

granfire said:


> so basically, the article suggests it's unfair to deny people their chip on their shoulder....



exactly!


----------



## pgsmith (Aug 1, 2013)

Sorry, but that's just plain stupid. Color-blindness is meant to be done by institutions. Restaurants, churches, libraries, museums, hotels, etc ... These are all places that need to be color-blind and treat everyone the same. Color-blindness is not meant to be a method of personal interaction. That would be stupid since each person that you interact with is different with their own background, history and ideology. That the writer assumed that color-blindness would be used as a means of personal interaction tells me that, psychologist or not, she needs to get out and interact with real people more.


----------



## Steve (Aug 1, 2013)

First, I agree that it's not your "responsibility" to heal anyone's wounds.  It's not an obligation that you, because your parents are Caucasian, must atone for the mistakes made by people you've never even met.  

But, there are times, IMO, where it's in your interest to do it.  Without even getting into the entire reparations and chips on shoulders issue, diversity is a very good thing.  Diversity of thought and culture are fundamental concepts upon which our country was founded.  We've all heard the metaphor of the Great American Melting Pot.  I think of it as more like a stew than a fondue.  What makes America pretty awesome is the fusion of multiple cultures.

Getting back to the article, it's willful ignorance to pretend that tension doesn't exist.  What I mean is that it's there whether you choose to acknowledge it or not.   This is a kind of conflict avoidance and often ends up making things worse over time.  So, while it's not your responsibility or even an obligation, it is often a good idea to resolve conflict.

To be clear, I'm talking about on a personal level.  One on one or within a group or team.


----------



## granfire (Aug 1, 2013)

yeah, but on a personal level it goes both ways...


----------



## Steve (Aug 1, 2013)

granfire said:


> yeah, but on a personal level it goes both ways...


I'm not sure I understand what you mean, Granfire.  Could you elaborate a little?


----------



## Tgace (Aug 1, 2013)

Steve said:


> First, I agree that it's not your "responsibility" to heal anyone's wounds.  It's not an obligation that you, because your parents are Caucasian, must atone for the mistakes made by people you've never even met.
> 
> But, there are times, IMO, where it's in your interest to do it.  Without even getting into the entire reparations and chips on shoulders issue, diversity is a very good thing.  Diversity of thought and culture are fundamental concepts upon which our country was founded.  We've all heard the metaphor of the Great American Melting Pot.  I think of it as more like a stew than a fondue.  What makes America pretty awesome is the fusion of multiple cultures.
> 
> ...



And I don't quite understand your point...it's in my best interest to do what? Take responsibility for something simply because of a lack of melanin in my skin?


----------



## Big Don (Aug 1, 2013)

I am such a racist bastard I don't have white friends, no, really, everyone at my dojo is hispanic, and other than that, my best friend is black. They don't feel I am to blame for past racism, not being idiots, why should I?


----------



## Steve (Aug 1, 2013)

Tgace said:


> And I don't quite understand your point...it's in my best interest to do what? Take responsibility for something simply because of a lack of melanin in my skin?


Simply this.  If you're on a team and there's conflict, it's generally in your best interest to resolve the conflict.  If that conflict is due to racial, ethnic or some other kind of cultural tension, ignoring that is counter productive.  

Are you obligated to address it?  Only if you're the boss, IMO.  Are you required to address it?  Only if it's created dysfunction to the degree that you have allegations of harassment, hostile work environment or a similar, legal situation.  You may also be required to address it if there is an EEO complaint, or if you have a union and a grievance or allegation of an unfair labor practice is alleged.  Otherwise, and the main point I wanted to make, is that resolving conflict is necessary in order to get things done.

So, to sum up.  If you're dealing with a one on one situation, or you're part of a group or team, even where there's no obligation to handle it, it's likely in your best interest.  

Acknowledging racial tension does not equal taking responsibility for it, though.  I don't think I ever said that you have to take responsibility for it.  Interesting that you went in that direction.


----------



## Steve (Aug 1, 2013)

Big Don said:


> I am such a racist bastard I don't have white friends, no, really, everyone at my dojo is hispanic, and other than that, my best friend is black. They don't feel I am to blame for past racism, not being idiots, why should I?


It's great that you're not a racist, Don.  And you don't have racist friends, either.  That's heartwarming.  

They could still be idiots, though.  All racists are idiots.  But not all idiots are racists.


----------



## pgsmith (Aug 1, 2013)

Steve said:


> It's great that you're not a racist, Don. And you don't have racist friends, either. That's heartwarming.
> 
> They could still be idiots, though. All racists are idiots. But not all idiots are racists.




  Sorry Steve, it won't let me rep you for that!


----------



## Tgace (Aug 1, 2013)

Steve said:


> Acknowledging racial tension does not equal taking responsibility for it, though.  I don't think I ever said that you have to take responsibility for it.  Interesting that you went in that direction.



Really?

This is what you wrote.



> _First, I agree that it's not your "responsibility" to heal anyone's wounds. *It's not an obligation that you, because your parents are Caucasian, must atone for the mistakes made by people you've never even met. *_
> 
> *But, there are times, IMO, where it's in your interest to do it.*



That seems pretty straightforward.


----------



## Sukerkin (Aug 1, 2013)

What a load of self loathing cobblers I'm reading here by those (I'm looking at you, Steve ) who are intelligent enough to know better.  

I know full well that there was real hatred and segregation in America right up to my own life-time but, by any measure, you are not responsible for what your ancestors did ... the end.  

Any 'minorities' who want to be victims and perpetuate something bad, well that's up to them but they shouldn't be surprised if things don't get any better whilst they play that simple-minded game because there are plenty of those who *are* truly racist quite willing to play along with that.  Meantime, just as there are black people fed up to the back teeth of being treated with suspicion because people the same colour as them choose not to be good citizens, so there are white people equally pissed off at being treated as if they were automatically racist neo-nazi's just because they don't have a tan.

Here's a big piece of advice to those still stirring the race pot a generation on from when it started to cease to be relevant - either help make things better or **** off.

Can you tell that I have a whole new perspective on the trivialities of human idiocy since my wife died?

Anyhow, I'm not supposed to be in here ... I put myself on self-imposed leave from the Study as the irony of it's name was getting too much for me {slinks off growling}.


----------



## Steve (Aug 1, 2013)

Tgace said:


> Really?
> 
> This is what you wrote.
> 
> That seems pretty straightforward.



Okay.  So thanks for allowing me to clarify.  What are you looking for, Tgace?  Just feel like busting my balls a little?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## billc (Aug 1, 2013)

And we keep pulling you back in Sukerkin...


----------



## Steve (Aug 1, 2013)

Sukerkin said:


> What a load of self loathing cobblers I'm reading here by those (I'm looking at you, Steve ) who are intelligent enough to know better.
> 
> I know full well that there was real hatred and segregation in America right up to my own life-time but, by any measure, you are not responsible for what your ancestors did ... the end.
> 
> ...



I think you guys are reading into my posts things I don't intend.  I'm not saying to beat yourself up or anguish about things you had nothing to do with.  I'm just saying that, if there's some kind of conflict or tension on a team or in a group, it does no good to dismiss or ignore that conflict, racial or otherwise.  Better for everyone to acknowledge and address it.  Unless you're British, who might prefer to suppress it.  

I'd argue that this is making things better.  

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## Big Don (Aug 1, 2013)

Steve said:


> Simply this.  If you're on a team and there's conflict, it's generally in your best interest to resolve the conflict.  If that conflict is due to racial, ethnic or some other kind of cultural tension, ignoring that is counter productive.
> 
> Are you obligated to address it?  Only if you're the boss, IMO.  Are you required to address it?  Only if it's created dysfunction to the degree that you have allegations of harassment, hostile work environment or a similar, legal situation.  You may also be required to address it if there is an EEO complaint, or if you have a union and a grievance or allegation of an unfair labor practice is alleged.  Otherwise, and the main point I wanted to make, is that resolving conflict is necessary in order to get things done.
> 
> ...


How about acknowledging racial tension is promulgated by those with chips on their shoulder? 
Why is it in my best interests to placate idiots? Simply because there are so many? If I'm one on one or part of a team, and there is racial tension, someone is fing stupid.


----------



## Tgace (Aug 1, 2013)

Steve said:


> Okay.  So thanks for allowing me to clarify.  What are you looking for, Tgace?  Just feel like busting my balls a little?
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD



Maybe just a little.  

The "_in__teresting _that *you *went in *that *direction" part seemed like a jab so I returned. Just a little sparring is all. 

:boxing:


----------



## Steve (Aug 1, 2013)

Tgace said:


> Maybe just a little.
> 
> The "_in__teresting _that *you *went in *that *direction" part seemed like a jab so I returned. Just a little sparring is all.
> 
> :boxing:



Hah!  I appreciate the candor.  I'm guilty of the same from time to time.  

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Touch Of Death (Aug 1, 2013)

Big Don said:


> *Colorblind Ideology is a Form of Racism*
> 
> 
> A colorblind approach allows us to deny uncomfortable cultural differences.
> ...


Her books get stupider and stupider. LOL


----------



## Touch Of Death (Aug 1, 2013)

granfire said:


> So basically, the article suggests it's unfair to deny people their chip on their shoulder....
> 
> Interesting perspective.


It isn't our jobs, ever, to deny someones identity.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Aug 2, 2013)

Touch Of Death said:


> It isn't our jobs, ever, to deny someones identity.


Re-Label at your peril.


----------



## granfire (Aug 2, 2013)

Touch Of Death said:


> It isn't our jobs, ever, to deny someones identity.



Identity?
Vs bad attitude? (sry, on the beginning of the cup of coffee...synapses are not fireing fast enough...)


----------



## Touch Of Death (Aug 2, 2013)

granfire said:


> Identity?
> Vs bad attitude? (sry, on the beginning of the cup of coffee...synapses are not fireing fast enough...)


Attitude is your identity, Sugar.  (for your coffee)


----------



## granfire (Aug 2, 2013)

Thanks for the sugar, Honey.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Aug 2, 2013)

pgsmith said:


> Sorry, but that's just plain stupid. Color-blindness is meant to be done by institutions. Restaurants, churches, libraries, museums, hotels, etc ... These are all places that need to be color-blind and treat everyone the same. Color-blindness is not meant to be a method of personal interaction. That would be stupid since each person that you interact with is different with their own background, history and ideology. That the writer assumed that color-blindness would be used as a means of personal interaction tells me that, psychologist or not, she needs to get out and interact with real people more.



Institutions are made up of individuals.  Often with common beliefs and goals.



Sukerkin said:


> What a load of self loathing cobblers I'm reading here by those (I'm looking at you, Steve ) who are intelligent enough to know better.
> 
> I know full well that there was real hatred and segregation in America right up to my own life-time but, by any measure, you are not responsible for what your ancestors did ... the end.
> 
> ...



As is often the case, Sukerkin, you manage to slip in a really good point, that most don't see.  It has long been my belief that many groups who have managed to make themselves victims, whether over race, nationality, religion, or whatever, don't wish to give up that status.  Granted, there has to be something done to relieve them of being a victim of prejudice.  But once that begins to take shape, there will be a split.  Those who try to take advantage of their new-found opportunities (slight though they may be at the beginning) which was what they wanted, and those who want to keep complaining, but maintain the status quo.  Otherwise they then would have to accept that they must strive on an equal basis and can't demand the freebies they may be getting.

Please, under no circumstance suppose, I approve of prejudice.  I wasn't brought up that way.  Also, having been the victim of it, I despise it.  Granted, the prejudice against me did not rise to the level of death, but in a couple of instances it well could have.  But I didn't let it get me down, nor did I try to demand preferential treatment.  Even more, I understand there are many complexities, especially in regards to racial conflict in the USA.  But acceptance of being a constant victim seems not to work either.  

Sad to say, it hasn't gone completely away in your lifetime in the USA.  I think some good strides have been made, but it isn't gone.



Big Don said:


> *How about acknowledging racial tension is promulgated by those with chips on their shoulder? *
> Why is it in my best interests to placate idiots? Simply because there are so many? If I'm one on one or part of a team, and there is racial tension, someone is fing stupid.



Personally, I will gladly acknowledge that racial tension is usually promulgated by those with chips on their shoulders, as long as you will acknowledge that too many on both sides of the race issue (since that is what the thread is about) have chips on their shoulders.  Which makes me wonder about your second sentence.  I would suggest there are enough idiots and stupid people on both side of the issue to go around.  I accept that you would not be one of them.


----------



## pgsmith (Aug 2, 2013)

There is a very large difference between being insensitive and self-centered (treating everyone exactly the same) and treating everyone as individuals. Being aware of cultural differences is *not* the same thing as feeling responsible for past generation's actions. 

As an example, here's a situation that occured to me several years back. I was in a bar with a number of people from work. The discussion at the time was about an Indian tribe who paid alot of money to a law firm regarding getting a casino set up, and the lawyers skipped town with their money. One of the guys with our group said loudly that they should find them and scalp them all. I was offended as I have Indian ancestry. I explained to the guy that scalping was invented by white folks as a way of getting paid the bounty for killing Indians, and they got paid the same whether they killed men, women, or children. Past atrocities are never funny.

In another situation, I was with a Jewish friend of mine who's father was an Auschwitz survivor. The subject under discussion was the death penalty. One of our friends, who tends to be loud and obnoxious anyway, said that they should just take them and toss them into a crematorium furnace. I could tell it bothered my Jewish friend a lot, although he didn't bother to say anything about it. 

So, in both of these situations someone was being an insensitive boob. Doesn't mean they should have felt responsible for what happened in the past but, by the same token, they shouldn't just ignore it because we are all shaped by our individual histories. Of course, I also know a lot of people (of various colors) that have no problem with being an insensitive boob, and have no desire to learn or pay attention to anything other than their own small world.


----------



## Steve (Aug 2, 2013)

oftheherd1 said:


> Personally, I will gladly acknowledge that racial tension is usually promulgated by those with chips on their shoulders, as long as you will acknowledge that too many on both sides of the race issue (since that is what the thread is about) have chips on their shoulders.  Which makes me wonder about your second sentence.  I would suggest there are enough idiots and stupid people on both side of the issue to go around.  I accept that you would not be one of them.


Great post.  I appreciated reading it.  But I got to the end and actually snorted out loud a little when you said this " I accept that you would not be one of them" about this:





> "
> 
> 
> 
> ...


_
_If that doesn't look like a giant chip on a shoulder, I guess I would like to know what a chip on a shoulder really looks like.  Can you guys help me out with that?


----------



## Big Don (Aug 3, 2013)

> the only wise and honorable and Christian thing to do is to treat each  black man and each white man strictly on his merits as a man, giving him  no more and no less than he shows himself worthy to have.


Theodore Roosevelt


----------



## Tgace (Aug 3, 2013)

View attachment $995129_549746878418391_1778631693_n.jpg


----------



## granfire (Aug 3, 2013)

Tgace said:


> View attachment 18205



A wise man!
I wonder what he would have to say to today's landscape....


----------



## billc (Aug 3, 2013)

This might interest those interested in this topic...Adam Corolla, and his co-host Dr. Drew Pinski discuss the issue of the race card and the discussion of race problems...

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2013/08/02/carolla-drew-racism-govt-overreach



> Carolla dedicated part of his Aug. 1 podcast to those who live to sling the "racist" label at those with whom they disagree--typically folks on the left. He began by decrying how liberals use the race card to shut down the debate without offering real solutions to the cultural problems in play.They did what a lot of folks on the left do, which is they take a problem&#8230; Then they take the person who would like to find the root of the problem, label him a racist, offer no solutions for the problem, other than me and my racism and then move on. As conquering heroes, by the way.
> 
> ​Carolla then played his own race card, a tactic people who lean right rarely attempt.You want to know what&#8217;s racist? Treating races like kids,&#8221; Carolla said. &#8220;Like they can&#8217;t handle the truth. Like they can&#8217;t pull themselves up by their own boot-straps. What&#8217;s racist is all the super-scared white people, who live in the ****in&#8217; triple-gated communities who are scared ******** about certain races and don&#8217;t believe, in their heart &#8212; ultimate racism &#8212; that they&#8217;re capable of doing what they&#8217;re capable of doing. That&#8217;s racism.
> 
> ​Dr. Drew Pinsky, his tag-team partner on the podcast, is often guarded during such volatile conversations. Not this time.We [white people] are not allowed to weigh-in on much nowadays. Free speech is a fallacy.​



A more detailed look at Corolla's comments to the Huffington Post...

http://dailycaller.com/2013/08/01/c...-post-left-wing-hollywood-and-racist-baiters/



> CAROLLA: And that&#8217;s why you have to focus on family and education.
> 
> HUFFPO: It won&#8217;t solve everything.
> 
> ...





> &#8220;Me asking somebody&#8230;to engage in a behavior that I know would lead to a path to success is not racist&#8230; Look, listen, there&#8217;s a club in this town&#8230; The cool guy comedy club is super left-wing, throws around a lot of terms like &#8216;the pipeline from schools to prisons&#8217; and &#8216;voter suppression&#8217; and things like that,&#8221; Carolla continued. &#8220;The little things that you and I wouldn&#8217;t think of as a big issue, such as getting valid ID in the state that you live in, or focusing on schoolwork and education and homework and things like that. These are the things that they don&#8217;t think that certain cultures are up to. And so they use that and they sit up on top of Mount Pious, and they look down, and they throw around these terms, and then they all go to their parties that don&#8217;t involve any of these nationalities, and they smoke weed and they talk about what a racist I am.&#8221;



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/08/01/c...g-hollywood-and-racist-baiters/#ixzz2axjUzYK0


----------



## ballen0351 (Aug 4, 2013)

You can never have equality when you go out of your way to to cater to one group.  When you purposely overlook one person because of skin color to find someone of another skin color.  I know for a fact we overlook better qualified white males to higher less qualified minorities.  Ive been in the room during these conversations.  Ive heard supervisors say we cant hire him we need a minority to fill this spot.  Now there is talk about lowering standards for background checks because the local NAACP said its not reasonable to hold a minority growing up in the inner city t the same standards as a white guy in the county.  Mainly they disagree with the drug use cap and the credit score requirements.   
  I just not 30 min ago talked to our K9 supervisor and asked him how our new guys in K9 school where doing he said 3 were doing great and 1 that he was ordered to put in the class a minority might not pass. He told them before the class started the minority wasn't a good choice not because hes a minority but hes afraid of dogs.  he wont admit it but you can tell in how he interacts with the dog.  People know this happens and it causes resentment.
Add that to the double standards in behavior and attitude and you can never get rid of racism.  I get called a racist daily at work it does not bother me but the people calling me that I think genuinely believe Im picking on them because of race.  when you go around expecting discrimination its easy to find it even if its not there


----------

