How racist are you? Take this test.

jimmurphy said:

An observation.

DB came on here to acknowledge persistent, subtle, sometimes unconscious ways that racism pervades our society.

Rather than opening a dialogue of any productive sort, he was immediately attacked as a racist.

How are we to discuss race at all under these conditions? Isn't this exactly what the right decries as "PC" ?

Just seems like there is a hair trigger that stifles all discussion and then any learning that may result.

Yup.

ml1 said:

by the same logic, I can't be racist because I think Hendrix's version of "All Along The Watchtower" blows away Dylan's.

But that might make you anti-semitic in the mind of certain people. (person?)

If this was an attack, then I'm Genghis Khan.

annielou said:

Was it u who said: "I can't think of one song by Prince that I can't do without." Well that's fine, a matter of taste I guess.

But then: " ( I happen to love O'Connor's cover of Nothing Compares 2 U - but for that I really have to give Sinead 90% of the credit for what makes that song so great.)"

Really? 90%?

on the scale of attacks, yes, it's closer to a 1 than a 10.

But it's clearly on the scale, Mr. Kahn. How else would you characterize it (when coupled with her first post.)?

ETA: or to put it another way, what was the point of the two posts? To accuse me of being racist, clearly. How is that not an attack?

DaveSchmidt said:

If this was an attack, then I'm Genghis Khan.

annielou said:

Was it u who said: "I can't think of one song by Prince that I can't do without." Well that's fine, a matter of taste I guess.

But then: " ( I happen to love O'Connor's cover of Nothing Compares 2 U - but for that I really have to give Sinead 90% of the credit for what makes that song so great.)"

Really? 90%?

It was the mildest of challenges for you to look at something you wrote in a different light. If that -- not to mention reproaches that are significantly more pointed -- is out of bounds, then the discussion is more likely to end up just a validation of the beliefs that people brought to it. Not exactly my idea of progress.

drummerboy said:



btw - I think Sinead's tearing up the Pope was about as brave an act I've seen a performer ever do.

Most people don't even know why she did it.

Because the Church actively shields pedophiles from law enforcement and simply transfers them to a new community when they get caught abusing children?

Drummerboy. My comments were an attempt to point out , in the spirit of your "are you a racist?" test, that we may casually comment on a subject that others find off-putting and we don't really know the reason. Wasn't the purpose of the test to offer scenarios for reflection? I'm not interested in going on about the historic marginalization of Black artists, of questioning their genius while easily propping up those who benefit from that genius. This is the backdrop to own my thinking on this.

I didn't say it was out of bounds. She said something and I responded in a manner I felt appropriate, but that you did not.

DaveSchmidt said:

It was the mildest of challenges for you to look at something you wrote in a different light. If that -- not to mention reproaches that are significantly more pointed -- is out of bounds, then the discussion is more likely to end up just a validation of the beliefs that people brought to it. Not exactly my idea of progress.

I understand the point of your comments - and they may be valid for someone else. They simply were not when directed at me.

annielou said:

Drummerboy. My comments were an attempt to point out , in the spirit of your "are you a racist?" test, that we may casually comment on a subject that others find off-putting and we don't really know the reason. Wasn't the purpose of the test to offer scenarios for reflection? I'm not interested in going on about the historic marginalization of Black artists, of questioning their genius while easily propping up those who benefit from that genius. This is the backdrop to own my thinking on this.

2 pages in and I still don't know how racist I am.

ridski said:

2 pages in and I still don't know how racist I am.

Did you take the test? Add up your total Yes answers and divide by the number of questions. That will tell you, on a percentage basis, how racist you are.

what he said

tjohn said:

ridski said:

2 pages in and I still don't know how racist I am.

Did you take the test? Add up your total Yes answers and divide by the number of questions. That will tell you, on a percentage basis, how racist you are.

drummerboy said:

I didn't say it was out of bounds.

Then here's to more attacks, challenges, reproaches, rebukes or whatever we want to call them just like it.

??

DaveSchmidt said:

drummerboy said:

I didn't say it was out of bounds.

Then here's to more attacks, challenges, reproaches, rebukes or whatever we want to call them just like it.

drummerboy said:

what he said

tjohn said:

ridski said:

2 pages in and I still don't know how racist I am.

Did you take the test? Add up your total Yes answers and divide by the number of questions. That will tell you, on a percentage basis, how racist you are.

Damn. I'm like totally racist.

ridski said:

drummerboy said:

what he said

tjohn said:

ridski said:

2 pages in and I still don't know how racist I am.

Did you take the test? Add up your total Yes answers and divide by the number of questions. That will tell you, on a percentage basis, how racist you are.

Damn. I'm like totally racist.

Haha! I'm hardly racist at all...for a white guy.

but you're honest

ridski said:

drummerboy said:

what he said

tjohn said:

ridski said:

2 pages in and I still don't know how racist I am.

Did you take the test? Add up your total Yes answers and divide by the number of questions. That will tell you, on a percentage basis, how racist you are.

Damn. I'm like totally racist.

ml1 said:

but you're honest

ridski said:

drummerboy said:

what he said

tjohn said:

ridski said:

2 pages in and I still don't know how racist I am.

Did you take the test? Add up your total Yes answers and divide by the number of questions. That will tell you, on a percentage basis, how racist you are.

Damn. I'm like totally racist.

Here's honest. I scored 13%, but those questions are only about African Americans, and some of my answers included "Yes, when I was about 12" and "Yes, and I think we all should be able to". But it didn't ask for qualifiers and I didn't answer "yes" to the last question, so I'm totally racist.

If annielou is right that the purpose of the test is to "offer scenarios for reflection," and I think she is, anyone who answers "yes" to the final question is kind of missing the point.

the last question is kind of silly when there's no "passing" that type of quiz. I would hope that we can just be honest with ourselves and answer truthfully. I would also hope that it might give pause to the people who insist racism is mostly defeated, and the people who think racism toward white people is a problem.

the unfortunate issue with these types of quizzes or discussions is that for most people, honest self-reflection is difficult, cognitive dissonance is strong, and resistance to attitude change is formidable.

DaveSchmidt said:

If annielou is right that the purpose of the test is to "offer scenarios for reflection," and I think she is, anyone who answers "yes" to the final question is kind of missing the point.

Cool. So, we don't have to pass? But we all get participation trophies?

As usual, participation has its own rewards.

As Woody says, "Showing up is 80 percent of life."

well, the "purpose" of the test will vary to the individual. Some may in fact be defensive about answering these questions, and can be concerned about whether they're being "too racist", rather than using the questions for reflection while being secure in their answers.

The last question is therefore perfectly valid.

DaveSchmidt said:

If annielou is right that the purpose of the test is to "offer scenarios for reflection," and I think she is, anyone who answers "yes" to the final question is kind of missing the point.

drummerboy said:

well, the "purpose" of the test will vary to the individual. Some may in fact be defensive about answering these questions, and can be concerned about whether they're being "too racist", rather than using the questions for reflection while being secure in their answers.

Other than the last clause, which in my view is an oxymoron, I don't doubt you're right.

Seems to me the purpose of the test is remind liberals that everyone's racist, including them.

Your headline to this thread is poorly written. We are all racist. The test is racist. I'm doubly more racist for even mentioning the final question.

Steve said:

ml1 said:

by the same logic, I can't be racist because I think Hendrix's version of "All Along The Watchtower" blows away Dylan's.

No, you couldn't because Dylan agrees.

Everyone does Dylan songs better than Dylan.

I do not understand why the following question was included.

Have you ever found yourself thinking of Africa as a country?

Thinking that way is not racist it's just stupid. Is there a term similar to "illiterate" for someone with no sense of geography?

Do Brexit supporters and the like think that anyone who thinks of Europe as a country is an anti-white racist?

I agree the question is more about geographical literacy. What's Brexit have to do with whether someone knows geography? Do you know what Brexit is?

That's racist!

ridski said:

Seems to me the purpose of the test is remind liberals that everyone's racist, including them.

Your headline to this thread is poorly written. We are all racist. The test is racist. I'm doubly more racist for even mentioning the final question.