Quote:
Originally Posted by oilfieldscum
Actually I don't have a purpose in this thread unlike yourself.
|
That's strange, you said "my work is done here". Unless you do work for no reason, then you had a reason, a purpose, for doing what you've done in this thread. I wasn't asking if you had multiple purposes, some ulterior, some explicit. I was simply expounding on your comment that you had a purpose here, and that now it was done. I was inquiring what that purpose was, and now you're telling me there was no reason for the work you did here in this thread. It just seemed like a strange dichotomy is all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilfieldscum
What would your purpose be?
|
I believe I answered this back in post #32. I'll reprint it for your benefit since you missed it the first time.
"
P.S.-The point of this thread wasn't to "apologize" for my comment. It wasn't to make people angry. It wasn't to stir a racism debate. It was a social experiment to see how other people would interpret the comment, and hence, how they would react here. Explaining it may cause someone to think about it, and possibly analyze how they react to others here on the Internet, where it's virtually (no pun intended) impossible to know the true intent of any typed comment."
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilfieldscum
To inform the rest of us less educated (i.e. lower class) members than yourself here.
|
Ah, I begin to see a bit more of the picture. Most people would apologize right now and say "Oh, I apologize OFS. You interpreted my 'I AM superior to people here on the board' to mean that I'm superior to you as an individual. That's not the case, and I'm sorry you took it that way." I'm not going to do any such thing. I will never apologize for someone misinterpreting my comments, that's their fault, not mine. I will say that you're also making an incorrect correlation. First of all, I think you meant to use "e.g.' instead of "i.e." When you mean “for example,” use e.g. It is an abbreviation for the Latin phrase
exempli gratia. When you mean “that is,” use “i.e.” It is an abbreviation for the Latin phrase
id est. Either can be used to clarify a preceding statement, the first by example, the second by restating the idea more clearly or expanding upon it. Since you weren't clarifying or expanding on the words "less educated" we assume you should have used i.e., meaning an example of "less educated" is "lower class." That point aside, less educated does not equate to lower class, again, that's simply a stereotype.
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilfieldscum
Nada. Another look at me thread and at the same time a sensitive topic that might get others members upset and maybe pointed or banned? Well maybe.
|
Again OFS, I'm not responsible for any ulterior motives you assign to this thread, or how you react to your opinions of those fabricated motives. I've explained exactly what this thread was about, anything else, and your reactions to that, is your issue, not mine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilfieldscum
Could it be that you are still upset about not being a mod here?
|
You'll have to connect the dots for me here OFS. Can you please lead me through the line of reasoning that connects me putting my name in for moderator almost a year ago, to me being upset about not being picked, to me starting this thread? I don't think I can fully answer your question until I see where you're coming from.
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilfieldscum
And of course DH is just defending his buddy although that is a little gay. Oops now that is stereotyping for me to say that.
|
It is stereotyping, but this thread wasn't about whether stereotyping is bad or good, wrong or right, so feel free to stereotype all you want. Very rarely will anyone else but you know your true intent behind stating the stereotype.
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilfieldscum
Back on topic though there are some good books and articles on racism. Here are a few. Perhaps you might want to check them out.
|
Interesting reads, I'll focus only on your quote:
"Stereotypes reflect misunderstanding, but also anchor social representations of a hierarchy of group positions (ethnic hierarchy)"
Which of course can lead to racism."
This is quoted from the abstract of Ethnic and Racial Studies, not the text of the article, but nowhere does Dr. Hagendoorn make a connection between ethnic heirarchies and racism. The part in black is what you added on your own. Ethnic heirarchies are about privilege, rights, and comparison of social standing, perceived or real. Further, these heirarchies are defined not by the people at the top of the heirarchies, but by the people who perceive themselves to be below the top level. That's not racism, that's anti-racism. It's not the people at the top saying "WE'RE superior" it's the people at the bottom saying "THEY'RE superior". Massive difference, not only from a linguistic, but also a social psychological standpoint. For the people at the top, race plays almost no role in their lives. For the people who think of themselves as below that, it can not only shape wealth and prestige, but the very fabric of their lives.
