German museum in racism row over partial ban of white people

The row centres around the exhibition 'This is Colonialism' and the museum's decision to restrict white people from entering a small section of the display

Police officers are gathered in front of the Zeche Zollern museum in Dortmund, the focus of what social networks are describing as a racism scandal.

The row centres around the exhibition 'This is Colonialism' and the museum's decision to restrict white people from entering a small section of the display. For several months now, Saturdays at the museum have been reserved for black people and people of colour to explore a colonialism exhibition

The museum claims the objective is not to be discriminatory, but to reserve a safe space for reflection for non-whites.

ebenixo,

You can fix racism with racism trust us

Numerol,

I can’t believe some comments here are defending this shit…

darq,
darq avatar

I kinda wish people cared as much about the actual discrimination minoritised people face that affects their ability to live their lives fully, as they do about restricting entry to a single museum exhibit one day a week.

nicetriangle,
nicetriangle avatar

I don’t care about the actual act itself of restricting white people from some museum for a day. In a bubble? Who gives a shit.

But this kinda stuff just diminishes the credibility of legitimate movements meant to actually improve equity and equality. It sways the general public into thinking that rights activism is immature and unreasonable.

It gives the AfD sort of parties of the world really easy ammo and is basically just handing them red herrings served on a silver platter.

Shit is dumb and counter productive.

darq,
darq avatar

I strongly disagree with the argument that we should moderate our behaviour based on what the people who hate us might say about us.

Bigots and fascists don't need to be "given ammo". They just make up their ammo no matter what we do. They lie, all the time. It doesn't matter what we do or don't do, they will find a way to feel aggrieved. Changing our behaviour based on what they might say only allows them power and control over us. And it limits what we can do to actually help the marginalised people they target.

We need to be better about where we spend our efforts. We should focus on helping people, regardless of what bigots say. It's a bad habit of moderates, to spend all their time arguing and negotiating with bigots, rather than supporting the people bigots target.

nicetriangle,
nicetriangle avatar

Regardless of what right wingers say, people in the middle – who frequently sway elections – look at news like this and I don't think it paints the left in a positive light.

darq,
darq avatar

Well I think it's a losing strategy to care how to right-wing portrays your actions. And I think that caring for minorities is more important than pandering to conservatives and even to some extent to moderates. Especially since historically rights have been won even when the progressive movements fighting for them were extremely unpopular, in other words pandering to the sensibilities of moderates would have lead the movements into stagnation.

WhyDoesntThisThingWork,

Stop saying “actual” this is “actua.l” It’s racism. full stop.

darq,
darq avatar

No :)

PugJesus,
PugJesus avatar

I would have been much more sympathetic if it was to prove a point, ie "This is the sense of exclusion experienced by those under colonial oppression", but no, it's just some real yikes-worthy stuff 😬

charliespider,

Maybe it is to prove a point and they just aren’t telling you!

PugJesus,
PugJesus avatar

The museum claims the objective is not to be discriminatory, but to reserve a safe space for reflection for non-whites.

wave_walnut,
wave_walnut avatar

They unconsciously discriminate against people with diverse racial roots but white skin, but when will they realize this?

earthling,
earthling avatar

Lol how is that unconscious? It’s a deliberate policy decision to exclude people of a certain skin color.

WhyDoesntThisThingWork,

Funny how the “race is a social construct” crowd don’t think it’s a construct anymore when they want to be racist towards white people.

darq,
darq avatar

So you would disagree that race is a social construct?

WhyDoesntThisThingWork,

That’s neither here nor there, the point is that people like you are always quick to point it out when it suits you to do so, and you’re quick not to bring it up when it doesn’t suit you to do so. It’s hypocritical and now I’m done engaging with you as you’ve already repeatedly demonstrated yourself to be a racist and I don’t want to associate with a racist.

darq,
darq avatar

Nice dodge.

I can see your post history, so I'm not surprised you'd not want to answer.

tomi000,

All people feeling angry about this, please consider one thing: This is a very minor incident of discrimination directed towards white people (rightful or not, doesnt matter). Take this anger/irritation/sadness and multiply it by 100. Minorities are experiencing these feelings every day.

Would you not like the possibility to experience activities while not having those negative feelings lingering inside you constantly?

bedrooms, (edited )

This is incredibly dumb, but tbh I understand their intention. In Germany you'll meet the worst kind of racists.

Once in Starbucks, a white cunt woman filled my coffee mug with trash while I was in the bathroom... Less extreme, but I think every Asian descendant was at least once told to go back to China. I have been mocked for my Asian eyes, etc.

Seriously, many of their grandparents were okay with locking Jews in camps, the population as a mass grabbed and shared Jews' properties, and then officially killed them in gas chambers.

Nacktmull,
@Nacktmull@feddit.de avatar

deleted_by_author

    •
    bedrooms,

    I didn't. If that's your take from this text of mine, I don't know how I could explain that to you.

    ElderWendigo,

    You’re not alone in being called a bigot here for describing bigotry. It’s absolutely nuts.

    bedrooms,

    So, maybe I edited my comment and they are replying to an old version which could've indeed been poor, so I don't blame them too much.

    Anyway, I'm finding out that those people who complain on the web often can't read. Especially the type who thinks in black or white basis. They can't see nuance. If people do see nuance, they often wouldn't attack unless I write something really stupid.

    Simply put, that type of people can't be argued with. They won't see the complexity of reality. Hence, it follows that they can't read. Maybe they are teenagers who love to write on Steam threads or something (god forbid, I love that too).

    So I often tell them they are wrong, with some explanation, yet also tell them I don't intend to convince them (because they aren't ready) and maybe that they have to read my text again (which they can't).

    randomperson,

    They killed 6 millions of Poles for shit and giggles. Never trust a German.

    tomi000,

    Funny how most people in this comment section probably got angrier over this than they have ever gotten over actual racism and dont see a problem with that.

    WhyDoesntThisThingWork,

    This IS actual racism.

    tomi000,

    Theres a difference between racism and discrimination

    Andjhostet,

    I actually see the value in providing a safe space for oppressed or marginalized communities, such in the way that women's shelters don't allow men.

    I don't know what the answer is be here, but it's not nearly as black and white (no pun intended) as commenters here seem to believe.

    MigratingtoLemmy,

    Doesn’t mean they have to soft ban white people. That’s akin to saying all whites are bad, which makes the people doing this equally racist.

    I’m not white btw

    FluorideMind,

    You say this as if allowing white patronage makes the space hostile, we can all coexist without hatred.

    tomi000,

    Unfortunately we cant yet (not all of us at least). In a world where racism is a thing of the past, there will be no need for safe spaces like these. But right now that is not the case.

    nicetriangle,
    nicetriangle avatar

    This kind of self defeating bullshit from the "progressive" wing of politics needs to stop. This is textbook throwing a stick into your own bicycle spokes tier nonsense.

    tomi000,

    When was the last time you got this angry over actual racism?

    nicetriangle,
    nicetriangle avatar

    Recently and quite frequently, actually. Thanks for checking.

    tomi000, (edited )

    That is good, thank you for your activism. I wish you would keep concerning yourself with those pressing matters instead of criticizing an organization providing a safe space for people in need. If at some point in the next few hundred years discrimination of other races has dwindled so much that the benefit of such safe spaces no longer outweighs the discrimination of whites, we should abolish them.

    nicetriangle,
    nicetriangle avatar

    👍

    WhyDoesntThisThingWork,

    This IS actual racism.

    half_fiction,

    I’m curious how they are enforcing this. Is it self-reported or is there someone at the door determining if you’re un-white enough? I’m half white and racially ambiguous, so not sure I’d make the cut lol. On the other hand, my grandparents were immigrants who lived under colonial rule.

    Nacktmull,
    @Nacktmull@feddit.de avatar

    They probably just inverted this chart …

    https://feddit.de/pictrs/image/e656014a-0074-4937-aa23-0ddca4489a70.jpeg

    idiomaddict,

    Frankly, the Irish, Saami, Palestinians, and lots of native Americans are all colonized people who might be considered or visually identified as white. That said, I’m in Germany, it can be racist af, so I absolutely understand how a safe space might be desirable.

    Hanabie,
    Hanabie avatar

    How is that even legal in Germany?

    FleetingTit,
    @FleetingTit@feddit.de avatar

    As long as it’s not a public institution they have “Hausrecht”, meaning they can decide who is allowed to enter and who isn’t*.

    ^^^*Terms ^^^and ^^^conditions ^^^apply

    can,

    This seems fine to me? Why shouldn’t they have a specific day to go and reflect without me being there?

    Zaktor,

    It’s not even a day, it’s 4 hours Saturday morning.

    earthling,
    earthling avatar

    “Why can’t we exclude some races sometimes guys?”

    Drusas,

    Maybe that's the only day of the week you have available to go. Maybe it doesn't help inclusionary cultural practices to intentionally separate races.

    Nobsi,

    Oh no i cannot go to a museum in the only 4 hours that i am free during the whole week. Discrimination!

    PugJesus,
    PugJesus avatar

    "No, it's okay, our 'Whites only' event is only 4 hours a week."

    Nobsi,

    LMAO, snowflake cannot handle not being welcome at an event theyre not welcome at.
    “But muh racism”
    “Hurr durr i cannot go to the safespace”
    You sound like a little whiny bitch. Just go sunday loser. Or any of the other days theyre open.

    PugJesus,
    PugJesus avatar

    “But muh racism”

    Sorry, I didn't realize I was talking to a racist. I'll be sure to remember that you're a far-right chud in the future.

    Nobsi,

    Yeah, come back when we are talking about an Event you actually want to go to. You’re just repeating far right talking points.
    Theres also safe spaces for women. Womens shelters. How come you’re not ranting and raving about not being allowed in there?
    Is that not discrimination?
    Isn’t that also worthy of you to make an argument?
    How about white only spaces that are white only 24/7?
    Where’s your activism about them?

    PugJesus,
    PugJesus avatar

    Yeah, come back when we are talking about an Event you actually want to go to. You’re just repeating far right talking points.

    Not that I have the chance since international travel is expensive, but I would love to go to an event on the crimes of colonialism in a museum. Sorry that I find it deeply uncomfortable that I would either be excluded on the basis of my race, or included because my blood quantum was the right ratio to please the council of racial purity?

    Theres also safe spaces for women. Womens shelters. How come you’re not ranting and raving about not being allowed in there?

    Because women's shelters exist for the purpose of providing aid to a specific demographic. They aren't public venues. Why is this so hard to understand?

    How about white only spaces that are white only 24/7?
    Where’s your activism about them?

    What the fuck space in the modern day is white only? I ask at least in the US.

    Nobsi,

    I find it deeply uncomfortable that I would either be excluded on the basis of my race, or included because my blood quantum was the right ratio

    You’re excused. Your reading comprehension is not on par with people who understand the difference between what you’re describing, and what is actually happening.
    Just to give you a small teeny tiny hint. You can go. But you cannot go to the safe space where affected people are; which btw is drumroll Not a public venue.

    What the fuck space in the modern day is white only? I ask at least in the US.

    Are you seriously asking where in the US you cannot go when you are not white?

    Because women’s shelters exist for the purpose of providing aid to a specific demographic.

    Yeah, like this event. What’s your point?

    PugJesus,
    PugJesus avatar

    You can go. But you cannot go to the safe space where affected people are; which btw is drumroll Not a public venue.

    Oh, the museum and its exhibit on colonialism isn't a public venue? Curious. I'm sure you can back this claim up.

    Are you seriously asking where in the US you cannot go when you are not white?

    Yes. Please, show me where in the US there are prohibitions on public venues for people who are not white.

    Nobsi,

    the museum and its exhibit on colonialism isn’t a public venue

    No, its private property. Just because they allow everyone in, doesnt mean its now public.
    They can kick you out for whatever reason they want.

    PugJesus,
    PugJesus avatar

    No, its private property. Just because they allow everyone in, doesnt mean its now public.

    I don't think you understand what a public venue is if you think being private property disqualifies it.

    They can kick you out for whatever reason they want.

    Not in the US. Not since 1964.

    Nobsi,

    Not in the US. Not since 1964

    There you go. Just say it: “I dont know what im talking about, because i am american and have only read an article by the alt right”

    In Germany you can. And thanks to that possibility we can create safe spaces away from people who cannot deal with being told no.

    Nobsi,

    Yes. Please, show me where in the US there are prohibitions on public venues for people who are not white.

    The city of Harrison Arkansas

    PugJesus,
    PugJesus avatar

    Yeah, that's what I thought, you were talking out of your ass.

    Nobsi,

    Sure, buster.

    Nefyedardu,

    The museum claims the objective is not to be discriminatory

    discriminatory
    "treating a person or group differently from other people, because of their race, gender, sexuality, etc."

    Nobsi,

    How are they treated differently?

    Nefyedardu,

    that's... the sole subject of the article.

    the museum's decision to restrict white people from entering a small section of the display

    Nobsi,

    Ok, so? They arent treated differently. They are just not allowed to access a certain space at a certain time because the business owners said so.
    Can they now not get a job because they couldnt access the space at that certain time?
    Thats not treatment. Thats just business.

    Nefyedardu,

    "They arent treated differently."

    "They are just not allowed to access a certain space at a certain time"

    That's called being treated differently... I really don't know what else to say.

    Can they now not get a job because they couldnt access the space at that certain time?

    Can a Cheetah run really fast? What relevance does that have to anything?

    Nobsi,

    Truly, white people are the most oppressed race.
    Now they can not… checks notes: Access a safe space for bipoc that is open 4 hours a week!!! Truly disgusting!!!

    Nefyedardu, (edited )

    What! You support Child Slavery?!

    See, I can also make up imaginary strawman arguments. You reason like a five-year-old.

    Nobsi,

    You dont even reason. you just keep repeating the same argument you had 2 posts ago.
    Its not discrimination. youre not missing out on anything. you just cannot access a safe space for bipoc. you can also not enter any womens shelters. are you now arguing that you are being discriminated against for being the wrong gender?

    Nefyedardu,

    you just keep repeating the same argument

    There is only one argument. Whether or not this is discrimination. You just plainly say it isn't because "they [White people] aren't being treated differently" with absolutely no justification for that claim. How can you not see that's just plainly nonsense? There wouldn't be a controversy if that was the case. This article wouldn't exist if that was the case. I suspect you are confused because you are thinking "discrimination" is something else. Maybe English is your second language or something but I did post the definition....

    Everything else you bring up about women's shelters and not being able to get a job and the "WhItE PeOpLe ArE sO OpPrEsSeD!" talking point are just red herrings that have no bearing on anything I said. I'm blocking you because I'm wasting my time replying to you spelling all this out, have a nice day.

    Nobsi,

    Lmao snowflake. Truly the most oppressed white people. Gamers rise up

    Nacktmull,
    @Nacktmull@feddit.de avatar

    deleted_by_author

    •
    Nobsi,

    It’s obvious that the argument still persists because you do not understand the Article.

    This is not a public venue, this is a safe space. just like a womens shelter is also a safe space.
    Just because you can enter it some times, doesnt mean you are being discriminated against.
    This is not a public toilet. This is not your local town hall. it is a museum that you pay to enter.

    There you go. now you hopefully understand this very basic concept.
    As you also have not realised. This is not white vs. black.
    It’s colonized vs. colonisers.

    Nacktmull,
    @Nacktmull@feddit.de avatar

    deleted_by_author

    •
    Nobsi,

    The “threat” thst you are looking for is mentioned in every article about this topic that isn’t written by right-wing media.
    Nobody cared about it before, only right-wingers or ““centrists”” do. People affected by the late effects of colonization deserve a safe space just like anyone else does. It’s for people of once colonized countries to talk to eachother, without anyone being there that may “nuh uhhhh that’s not what happened”.
    If you don’t see the need for this you may just be too privileged to understand any of it.
    Why shouldnt BiPOC people have a place where they can just be them? “Because i wanna go there” is not enough of an argument.

    Nacktmull, (edited )
    @Nacktmull@feddit.de avatar

    deleted_by_author

    •
    Nobsi,

    “Im have never been good at taking advantage of my privilege and I would not want to but project on me all you want, it´s just in your head so I don´t mind.”

    Wheres the daily racism towards you? Wheres the constant threat of deportation? All you are is a snowflake that cannot handle being told no.

    "I doubt that the tone of skin […] "
    Then you doubted wrong. How are you so delusional? Do you ever touch grass?
    In this country arabs, turks, germans who don’t quite look german and other Immigrants are being shittalked constantly. They are being treated differently. What the fuck does your theory of how society should work have anything to do with reality?

    Nacktmull, (edited )
    @Nacktmull@feddit.de avatar

    deleted_by_author

    •
    Nobsi,

    “never said there was racism towards me”.
    I know. I asked for your validity that you arent using your privilege. You just validated that you have a privilege. Good reading comprehension on your part.

    “However, I grew up in Hamburg, St. Pauli/Altona/”

    Okay cool, i live in Hamburg now and i hear Germans calling my friends kanaken and ausländer all the time. Your heartwarming story doesn’t even come close to proving the opposite of what i said. Oh you were friends with eith your friends? What a breaking discovery. People that grow up together arent racist towards eachother. Wow, nobel prize right here.

    “By the way, the decision for the partial banning of white people from the exhibition was made by a white person”.
    And? Cry about it.

    Nacktmull,
    @Nacktmull@feddit.de avatar

    deleted_by_author

    •
    Nobsi,

    Cry about it.

    Nacktmull,
    @Nacktmull@feddit.de avatar

    You are mistaken, the world does not revolve around you and I don´t give a shit :)

    Nobsi,

    Still crying huh?

    tomi000,

    They are saying it is not the objective. It might be a side effect.

    Try thinking about this: If you knew there was one person in your hometown who will punch you the moment they see you but you cant know who it is, wouldnt you feel more comfortable going out at a time when you know that person is at work? Not saying the people visiting the museum would be attacked, its just a thought experiment.

    Nefyedardu,

    They are saying it is not the objective. It might be a side effect.

    Well then the "side-effect" is discriminatory. I personally think it's a meaningless distinction.

    tomi000,

    May be, but the main objective is to provide a safe space. How sad it is that after so much history of discrimination white people still cant seem to find a little bit of compassion and compromise for the sake of others and still feel the need to keep their absolute power and control over them.

    Fizz,
    @Fizz@lemmy.nz avatar

    How could they think anything good would come out of doing that. All they do is give ammo to the other side.

    agarorn,

    We also have women only days in saunas. Is that a problem for you too?

    Fizz,
    @Fizz@lemmy.nz avatar

    This isn’t a problem for me nor is women only days. It’s an optics problem and I believe the backlash is going to do more damage than good.

    Also since I’m a man I would not go to a place that has women only days for gym or sauna.

    Nefyedardu, (edited )

    You act like there hasn't been a push for gender-neutral spaces for years now.

    agarorn,

    What? Do you know how German saunas work? Usually they are for all genders. People are cometely nude. There are also kids. You except people to not act sexually, it is a place of leisure, nothing sexual.

    Nevertheless most saunas I know have one day per week where they only allow women, so that they feel more save as there will always be some men how make the others uncomfortable.

    earthling,
    earthling avatar

    It’s also just plain racist.

    Onii-Chan,
    Onii-Chan avatar

    When you're so anti-racist, you come full circle and enact segregation again.

    PoliticalAgitator,

    There’s no good answer to the problem and the far-right uses that to always “win”.

    The museum creates a space for people of color to view the displays without having to worry about angry racists threatening them with violence. This makes racists angry and violent.

    If you buckle and open up the space, who moves in? Why, the racists of course! The space is no longer safe and people are intimidated out of it. The racists don’t want them seeing it, so now they don’t get to see it.

    If you don’t buckle, what happens? You get 600 “the left are the real racists” comments on social media from people privileged enough to have never been pushed from any space.

    Its the same formula whenever schools have LGBT spaces without homophobes or gyms and trains are “women only” to avoid being leered at and sexually assaulted.

    If anyone reading is having trouble relating to these feelings, imagine watching pornography with the actors parents standing behind you – whatever their feelings may be towards their daughters work, you’d definitely be more comfortable if they weren’t there.

    Nacktmull, (edited )
    @Nacktmull@feddit.de avatar

    If you buckle and open up the space, who moves in? Why, the racists of course! The space is no longer safe and people are intimidated out of it. The racists don’t want them seeing it, so now they don’t get to see it.

    Have you been to a museum in Germany, like … ever? German museums are as quiet and calm as it gets and they usually have security service too. Worst thing that can typically happen is you run into a class of school children on an excursion who make some noise …

    PoliticalAgitator,

    And how many of them are usually neo-nazis?

    Nacktmull, (edited )
    @Nacktmull@feddit.de avatar

    Usually zero percent of people who visit an exhibition about colonial times in a german museum are neo-nazis. Have you ever been to Germany? You sure sound like you haven’t …

    The museum creates a space for people of color to view the displays without having to worry about angry racists threatening them with violence

    Nope! That is not what happens in german museums. Germany is not USA - you are obviously projecting and you obviously have no clue what you are talking about.

    By the way, the decision for the banning of white people from the exhibition was made by a white person and was arbitrary as in not based on actual racist incidents or requests by people of color.

    PoliticalAgitator,

    Well isn’t your gate-keeping fascinatingly targeted?

    If someone offers potential justification you don’t agree with, clearly they’ve never been to a German museum.

    The people repeating your own opinions? They’re probably in a German museum right now, so no need to check their credentials.

    But also, the people who run those German museums also aren’t as qualified as you are to say what the problems they may or may not face, nor what the solutions should be.

    You must have a truly remarkable story to share about how you came to know more about German museums than anyone else in the world, except for other people on social media.

    Nacktmull,
    @Nacktmull@feddit.de avatar

    Please feel invited to find and post any articles about racist incidents that actually happened inside of german museums …

    PugJesus,
    PugJesus avatar

    The museum creates a space for people of color to view the displays without having to worry about angry racists threatening them with violence. This makes racists angry and violent.

    If you buckle and open up the space, who moves in? Why, the racists of course! The space is no longer safe and people are intimidated out of it. The racists don’t want them seeing it, so now they don’t get to see it.

    ... have you ever been to a museum before?

    They're usually pretty prompt in firmly asking you to leave if you make other people uncomfortable with your behavior.

    darq,
    darq avatar

    It's worth considering that it's not always about behaviour. Presence is also a factor. People are going to act and speak differently depending on who is around. This is especially true for charged topics such as discrimination and colonialism. I wouldn't be surprised if people affected by colonialism engage with the exhibit differently during the times where they're alone in the space.

    A parallel experience I can relate it to is being in LGBTQ spaces. When I'm with other LGBTQ people, I express myself more openly. In mixed company, I'll keep things to myself. Because I've learned that that is what is safest. And it's not the behaviour of the specific cishet people in the company causing that discomfort, so there's no behaviour to call out. But nonetheless their presence still has an effect because of a lifetime of previous experiences.

    PugJesus,
    PugJesus avatar

    It's worth considering that it's not always about behaviour. Presence is also a factor. People are going to act and speak differently depending on who is around. This is especially true for charged topics such as discrimination and colonialism. I wouldn't be surprised if people affected by colonialism engage with the exhibit differently during the times where they're alone in the space.

    You could say that about any demographic or combination of demographics though. Asians who are only amongst other Asians likely discuss the issue differently than in a group of Asian and black people. WoC likely discuss the issue very differently amongst only other women. Hell, black people from Africa likely will discuss the issue very differently amongst themselves than in a group mixed with black Germans. Should there separate 'African black people only' days? 'Women only'? 'Men only'? Separate 'Asians only' days?

    The concept of a safe space is one for private clubs, not public venues. Admittedly I bring a pretty strongly American bias into this seeing as that's what anti-discrimination law in the US is based on.

    darq,
    darq avatar

    You could say that about any demographic or combination of demographics though. Asians who are only amongst other Asians likely discuss the issue differently than in a group of Asian and black people. WoC likely discuss the issue very differently amongst only other women. Hell, black people from Africa likely will discuss the issue very differently amongst themselves than in a group mixed with black Germans. Should there separate 'African black people only' days? 'Women only'? 'Men only'? Separate 'Asians only' days?

    I mean... Yes and no.

    We can get more specific about demographics. But it's certainly not any combination of demographics. We usually place specific importance on demographic divides that feature particular conflicts or differences in institutional power. Like the one that an exhibit on colonialism would be focusing on. Not all combinations are going to have strong effects.

    But more to the point, of what relevance is this? Just because there are many different places where we could draw a line, doesn't mean a line cannot be drawn somewhere based on people's best efforts.

    PugJesus, (edited )
    PugJesus avatar

    We can get more specific about demographics. But it's certainly not any combination of demographics. We usually place specific importance on demographic divides that feature particular conflicts or differences in institutional power.

    Do you not think there is a considerable difference in the institutional power of black Europeans in comparison to black Africans throughout the history of colonialism? What about mixed-race people? Should they be excluded due to the differences in institutional power afforded to them under colonialism? Their presence might change the conversations being held. Am I to be counted as white because I pass? Is that not simply colorism? Or are we playing blood quantum games?

    But more to the point, of what relevance is this? Just because there are many different places where we could draw a line, doesn't mean a line cannot be drawn somewhere based on people's best efforts.

    The point of this is that the premise that "People will discuss the issue differently or more freely in a group of only X" is not particularly compelling in and of itself as a reason to exclude individuals from a part of a public venue on racial criteria.

    If the line was drawn at black Africans only, and not allowing black Europeans to participate, what would your reaction be then, do you think? If there was a day for whites only, how would you feel?

    darq,
    darq avatar

    Do you not think there is a considerable difference in the institutional power of black Europeans in comparison to black Africans throughout the history of colonialism? What about mixed-race people? Should they be excluded due to the differences in institutional power afforded to them under colonialism? Their presence might change the conversations being held. Am I to be counted as white because I pass? Is that not simply colorism? Or are we playing blood quantum games?

    As I haven't said anything about those topics, you're tilting at windmills here.

    The point of this is that the premise that "People will discuss the issue differently or more freely in a group of only X" is not particularly compelling in and of itself as a reason to exclude individuals from a part of a public venue on racial criteria.

    You're free to think that. I was just mentioning that there is more than just behaviour to consider, in response to your previous comment that inappropriate behaviour will get you removed from the museum.

    Ultimately, this whole thing is a nothing-burger. A single museum has set aside a 4 hour timeslot on one day a week for people of colour to enjoy a single exhibit about colonialism.

    There seems to be reasons for choosing to do so, even if one disagrees with them. And it's not some significant public exclusion that would degrade one's quality of life.

    PugJesus,
    PugJesus avatar

    As I haven't said anything about those topics, you're tilting at windmills here.

    That you've said nothing about those topics doesn't mean they're irrelevant. They operate on the same principles you're basing your argument for the legitimacy of this practice on. If you're reluctant to address how the principle applies as a point of comparison for why it might be unjust, maybe you should re-examine the principle. If you're concerned that doing so might make you uncomfortable, then you should definitely re-examine the principle.

    I ask the question again - as a mixed-race person, am I to be included or excluded according to the principle you're basing your argument on?

    Ultimately, this whole thing is a nothing-burger. A single museum has set aside a 4 hour timeslot on one day a week for people of colour to enjoy a single exhibit about colonialism.

    There seems to be reasons for choosing to do so, even if one disagrees with them. And it's not some significant public exclusion that would degrade one's quality of life.

    So you would regard this argument as likewise applicable to whites-only events, right?

    darq,
    darq avatar

    That you've said nothing about those topics doesn't mean they're irrelevant. They operate on the same principles you're basing your argument for the legitimacy of this practice on. If you're reluctant to address how the principle applies as a point of comparison for why it might be unjust, maybe you should re-examine the principle. If you're concerned that doing so might make you uncomfortable, then you should definitely re-examine the principle.

    You are mistaken. It's not that I'm not considering those topics. It's that I'm refusing to allow you to lead me around by the nose and make me chase after whatever point you want me to address, derailing the original conversation.

    So you would regard this argument as likewise applicable to whites-only events, right?

    As that's an entirely different situation, with an entirely different context, seems pretty easy to say I'd feel differently about it.

    PugJesus,
    PugJesus avatar

    You are mistaken. It's not that I'm not considering those topics. It's that I'm refusing to allow you to lead me around by the nose and make me chase after whatever point you want me to address, derailing the original conversation.

    Ah, so you aren't addressing the point because it makes you uncomfortable and you realize your point is not on firm ground, considering that the original conversation is about racial exclusion and why it isn't acceptable. How predictable.

    As that's an entirely different situation, with an entirely different context, seems pretty easy to say I'd feel differently about it.

    No, it's really not. All the arguments you put forth to justify this incident of racial exclusion are equally applicable to specific scenarios regarding white people and having conversations on issues that effect them. Sorry that you think racism is okay. I happen to think that racism is bad in all fucking scenarios.

    darq,
    darq avatar

    Ah, so you aren't addressing the point because it makes you uncomfortable, considering that the original conversation is about racial exclusion and why it isn't acceptable. How predictable.

    Are you incapable of reading?

    Or are you just so eager to throw out accusations than you just can't help yourself?

    Predictable.

    No, it's really not. All the arguments you put forth to justify this incident of racial exclusion are equally applicable to specific scenarios regarding white people and having conversations on issues that effect them. Sorry that you think racism is okay.

    And I'm sorry that you have a child's understanding of racism.

    Racism isn't terrible simply because of discrimination. Discrimination based on race is bad, but that isn't what makes racism so damaging. Racism is harmful because it is systemic, widespread, and has actual power behind the discrimination. Because those with systemic power deny those without access to what they need to live a fulfilling life.

    A minority group, lacking in systemic power, reserving a small amount of space for themselves is not the same as the majority group leveraging their systemic power to exclude the minority from society.

    PugJesus,
    PugJesus avatar

    Are you incapable of reading?

    Or are you just so eager to throw out accusations than you just can't help yourself?

    Oh, so the original conversation isn't about racial exclusion and why it isn't acceptable? Is that what you're saying? Or are you deflecting because you know you can't actually defend any of your points.

    Discrimination based on race is bad,

    I'm sorry, could you say this one louder? Because I'm pretty sure it's core to the issue here.

    A minority group, lacking in systemic power, reserving a small amount of space for themselves is not the same as the majority group leveraging their systemic power to exclude the minority from society.

    When the fuck did I say they were equally bad?

    It's dogshit people like you who make being mixed race in modern society still so fucking frustrating. Thanks.

    darq,
    darq avatar

    Absolutely wild that you are trying to accuse me of putting words in your mouth when you are constantly making up arguments for me and saying "is that what you are saying?"

    When the fuck did I say they were equally bad?

    You claimed they're equally applicable right here, dickhead:

    No, it's really not. All the arguments you put forth to justify this incident of racial exclusion are equally applicable to specific scenarios regarding white people and having conversations on issues that effect them. Sorry that you think racism is okay. I happen to think that racism is bad in all fucking scenarios.

    If you don't think they're equally bad, great!

    But then you know that throwing up that trash and accusing me of thinking racism is okay is nonsense.

    So you're just another bad-faith waste of time.

    PugJesus,
    PugJesus avatar

    You claimed they're equally applicable right here, dickhead:

    'Equally applicable' is not 'equally bad'. Jesus Christ, I can't believe I have to explain this to another human being. It is equally applicable to argue that a principle regarding the sanctity of human life renders the murder of one person and the murder of a million bad - they spring from the same principle. But they're not 'equally bad', the principle is 'equally applicable' ie they are both bad, not that they are both equally bad.

    For fuck's sake.

    If someone was racist against white people AND East Asians, and decided, on those principles, to beat me to a pulp in a back alley and call me racial slurs, that would be bad, because unprovoked violence and racism are both bad. That doesn't make it equally bad as the fucking totality of 19th century colonialism, even though 19th century colonialism is bad based on those principles. as well

    darq,
    darq avatar

    'Equally applicable' is not 'equally bad'. Jesus Christ, I can't believe I have to explain this to another human being.

    Oh sod right off.

    If you know they're not equally bad, then you understand they're different because of context.

    So you asking me:

    So you would regard this argument as likewise applicable to whites-only events, right?

    Is not only an obvious "gotcha" but you know it's an obvious "gotcha".

    PugJesus,
    PugJesus avatar

    Oh sod right off.

    If you know they're not equally bad, then you understand they're different because of context.

    'Different' does not mean 'not bad'. "This is bad" does not mean "This is as bad as all other crimes of this principle", it means "this is bad".

    Is not only an obvious "gotcha" but you know it's an obvious "gotcha".

    In what fucking way is asking you to acknowledge that racial exclusion is, at its core, bad, a 'gotcha'?

    darq,
    darq avatar

    In what fucking way is asking you to acknowledge that racial exclusion is, at its core, bad, a 'gotcha'?

    Because every time a minority group tries to claim space for themselves, people in the majority group claim it's the same thing as when the majority excludes the minority.

    It's a mainstay of discussions around race, sex, gender, sexuality, and pretty much every progressive topic.

    It's happening in this very thread for goodness sakes. People claiming racism against white people, completely ignoring what makes racism so damaging in the first place. As if every instance of discrimination is the same because they look kinda similar on their face.

    PugJesus,
    PugJesus avatar

    Because every time a minority group tries to claim space for themselves, people in the majority group claim it's the same thing as when the majority excludes the minority.

    Because at its core, as a matter of principle, making a PoC-only space because the discussion would be 'disrupted' by the mere presence of white people is bad, and in the same way that if a museum in Zimbabwe which had a section on Mugabe's racial policies had an exclusionary area for whites-only to discuss, because PoC might 'disrupt' the freedom of the conversation with their presence. It doesn't mean it's as bad as legal segregation. It doesn't mean it's the same as turning away minorities from a business as a whole. It doesn't mean it's as bad as 99% of racism in modern society. But it is still springing from the same fundamentally flawed principle that racial exclusion is acceptable.

    It's happening in this very thread for goodness sakes. People claiming racism against white people, completely ignoring what makes racism so damaging in the first place. As if every instance of discrimination is the same because they look kinda similar on their face.

    It is racism against white people, by definition, unless you're using 'power+prejudice' definition, which would render all sorts of racism suddenly 'not racism'. Hate crimes by black folk against Muslims in the environment after 9/11 would no longer be racism.

    Just because the racism is not as bad (and, distinctly, it is obviously and apparently not as bad as colonialism, or mass segregation by law, or the intermittent exclusion of races in individual businesses, or modern societal-level cultural prejudices) does not mean it is not bad. Just because it is a minor incident of racial exclusion from a public venue with good intent does not mean it is 'not bad', it just means you probably don't need an international embargo against Germany until they fix it. It's still bad.

    If someone, say, in this thread, commits well-meaning microaggressions against people of mixed-race without malice and with only the intent of buoying minorities not of mixed-race, not tearing down mixed-race individuals, that's still bad, and on the same principle that all racism is bad. That doesn't mean that they're as bad as people who call mixed-race people slurs - it doesn't even mean they're even close. But it does mean that it's still bad. It still fundamentally springs from a principle which should be examined with a critical eye in order to root it out for all incidents going forward.

    darq,
    darq avatar

    Because at its core, as a matter of principle

    People don't live in principle, we live in reality, and reality is messy.

    Taking into account the full context and effect of actions is important. And in many cases, things which violate our principles can still be, while not ideal, a net positive.

    In a world that is still contending with discrimination, not to mention the long-tail effects of historical discrimination, sometimes we are going to see things like minority groups creating spaces by excluding majority group members. And it's just not the same in practice, even if "in principle" it's bad because it's discrimination. Dogmatically sticking to the principle with no regard to the lives of the people living under it only perpetuates the effects of that historical injustice.

    PugJesus,
    PugJesus avatar

    People don't live in principle, we live in reality, and reality is messy.

    But reality is built on principles. Seeking to align reality with our principles is why life is less shitty now than it was in the 60s, or the 1910s, or the 1800s. Accepting the 'mess' as it is is nothing but stagnation and conservatism (in the realest sense, not in the 'reactionary chud' sense).

    Taking into account the full context and effect of actions is important. And in many cases, things which violate our principles can still be, while not ideal, a net positive.

    I don't necessarily disagree with the (hoho) principle of this, but that doesn't mean that those things should be seen as 'not bad'. They are bad. But they're a necessary evil, at best, and one should expect backlash to them, and such backlash is not inherently unreasonable, even if it is the least bad solution available at the time.

    In a world that is still contending with discrimination, not to mention the long-tail effects of historical discrimination, sometimes we are going to see things like minority groups creating spaces by excluding majority group members. And it's just not the same in practice, even if "in principle" it's bad because it's discrimination. Dogmatically sticking to the principle with no regard to the lives of the people living under it only perpetuates the effects of that historical injustice.

    Even if it's not the same in practice, that the principle is wrong should result in us seeking alternate paths around such solutions. Allowing bad principle to take root only ensures that it will remain, and torment future generations. I don't want to live in a society that's no longer racist against black people, but has then decided that those of Nepalese descent are just fundamentally disruptive to certain parts of 'our' society.

    darq,
    darq avatar

    But reality is built on principles. Seeking to align reality with our principles is why life is less shitty now than it was in the 60s, or the 1910s, or the 1800s.

    And dogmatically sticking to principles in ignorance of reality is why we are still contending with so much crap in our lives to this day.

    Sometimes we are going to need to deviate from principle. Because reality demands it, and shying away from it leads to worse outcomes.

    Accepting the 'mess' as it is is nothing but stagnation and conservatism (in the realest sense, not in the 'reactionary chud' sense).

    I said literally nothing about accepting the mess. You are completely off the mark with this comment.

    I don't necessarily disagree with the (hoho) principle of this, but that doesn't mean that those things should be seen as 'not bad'. They are bad. But they're a necessary evil, at best, and one should expect backlash to them, and such backlash is not inherently unreasonable, even if it is the least bad solution available at the time.

    If that backlash consistently prevents action to improve people's lives, then it becomes its own evil.

    Deviation from principle should be recognised as what it is, unfortunate but sometimes temporarily necessary because we do not live in a perfect world. It shouldn't be permanent. But yes we do sometimes have to take less-tha-perfect actions.

    Even if it's not the same in practice, that the principle is wrong should result in us seeking alternate paths around such solutions. Allowing bad principle to take root only ensures that it will remain, and torment future generations. I don't want to live in a society that's no longer racist against black people, but has then decided that those of Nepalese descent are just fundamentally disruptive to certain parts of 'our' society.

    You are making a whole bunch of assumptions about my position here. That any deviation from a pure principle is going to become permanent, or that I'd support it becoming permanent. And that is just not what I'm arguing for.

    PugJesus,
    PugJesus avatar

    You are making a whole bunch of assumptions about my position here. That any deviation from a pure principle is going to become permanent, or that I'd support it becoming permanent. And that is just not what I'm arguing for.

    As I said elsewhere, it's not that it's intended to be permanent. It's that temporary solutions often entrench themselves as stubbornly as permanent ones. But I'm done with this argument as a whole. I think we started poorly but ended better, but the whole subject exhausts me. Please just keep in mind that these exclusionary behaviors, in addition to the principles mentioned, create no end of trouble simply by their very existence with regards to the identity and belonging of mixed-race individuals.

    darq,
    darq avatar

    Please just keep in mind that these exclusionary behaviors, in addition to the principles mentioned, create no end of trouble simply by their very existence with regards to the identity and belonging of mixed-race individuals.

    That is fair, and I'm sorry you have to put up with that. It is often the same in my country for mixed race people, our implementation of affirmative action is far from ideal to say the least.

    I think we may have started from different sets of assumptions and argued past each other a bit. I'm sorry for that.

    PugJesus,
    PugJesus avatar

    I apologize too. I let my frustration and aggression boil over against someone operating in good-faith. Too used to dealing with people operating in bad faith, lmao.

    PoliticalAgitator,

    Been kicked out of a few have you? Or have you just happened to have repeatedly seen unruly people in them often enough to be able to confidently say they’ll promptly be removed?

    Sounds like it isn’t a very safe place for some people.

    PugJesus,
    PugJesus avatar

    Been kicked out of a few have you? Or have you just happened to have repeatedly seen unruly people in them often enough to be able to confidently say they’ll promptly be removed?

    I am - or rather, was - a constant visitor to museums of various kinds. Ones with no admission fee and small museums suffered more from the problem, though I wouldn't say it was ever common.

    Sounds like it isn’t a very safe place for some people.

    "Issues of disorder or creating public unease are promptly resolved."

    "Sounds unsafe!"

    ???

    PoliticalAgitator,

    They were still there in the first place. Is a bar that has 2 stabbings a night “safe” if the people with knives are promptly removed?

    Your “there’s nothing to worry about” comment just showed there was something to worry about.

    PugJesus,
    PugJesus avatar

    They were still there in the first place. Is a bar that has 2 stabbings a night “safe” if the people with knives are promptly removed?

    People being escorted out for being disorderly is very far from a stabbing, and furthermore, there are no public venues of any kind that lack disorderly conduct entirely. I don't really know what you're trying to get at here.

    Your “there’s nothing to worry about” comment just showed there was something to worry about.

    So by that standard, if there are any incidents of disorder in these narrowed racial colonialism discussion groups, we should regard them as unsafe and seek to further narrow the criteria? For the safety of the people there, who are clearly unsafe from the presence of any incidents of disorder, of any magnitude, ever.

    PoliticalAgitator,

    People being escorted out for being disorderly is very far from a stabbing

    The far-right are responsible for the majority of domestic terrorism the world over. It’s much easier to hand wave it away when you’re not the target.

    But if you were, what amount of “disorderly conduct” would you be cool with you and your family enduring? Staring? Physically blocking you? Tattoos and tshirts advertising how much they’d like to kill you? Screamed slurs? Screamed slurs at your children? Threats of violence? Punching? Stabbing?

    As gatekeeper of what people should feel, what is the correct amount of those things to tolerate so that other people don’t hurt their own feelings? When are we permitted to become uncomfortable? When are we allowed to feel in danger and when do we have to politely ignore it?

    Once there has already been an incident worthy of physically escorting someone from the building, do we have to feel okay instantly, or is it acceptable to still feel uneasy on the way to the car? What about the next day? What about if you end up on video?

    Of course if you had to answer all of these questions before a trip to the museum, you just wouldn’t go. That’s the chilling effect they’re after and they’re thrilled to hear you’re more upset at the idea of not being able to go to a museum one day a week.

    To equate that with the violence and threats minorities can be exposed to for even acknowledging historical oppression shows what a cozy little bubble you’ve been living in.

    But it’s not too late to lead by example. Grab yourself a pride shirt and go wandering around a Trump rally, safe in the knowledge they’ll kick out anyone who gets “disorderly”.

    NuPNuA,

    I can’t imagine most racists would even be aware of this exhibition if the museum hadn’t striesland effected it into the news cycle with this decision, which benevolent or not, us discrimination.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • worldnews
  • khanakhh
  • DreamBathrooms
  • ethstaker
  • magazineikmin
  • osvaldo12
  • Durango
  • Youngstown
  • ngwrru68w68
  • slotface
  • rosin
  • mdbf
  • kavyap
  • InstantRegret
  • tester
  • JUstTest
  • thenastyranch
  • cisconetworking
  • tacticalgear
  • cubers
  • everett
  • modclub
  • GTA5RPClips
  • anitta
  • Leos
  • provamag3
  • normalnudes
  • megavids
  • lostlight
  • All magazines
    •