Are People Here Racist?

[thaibeachlovers]

Some have a habit of accusing a Poster of Racialism,purely to deny them of another point of view, that's what being PC is all about,.....gagging!

no I'm aware of what rascism is, it's not a new term.

There are are same very rascist things said very often here, but relax I never mention your names as being one of the guilty party.

surely you have seen it here.

In my experience of life, people are basically tribal in nature, and part of being tribal is being against the "other".

I'm sure that while some offerings on TV could be construed as being racist, a Thai forum would be just as full of rantings against farangs.

Incidentally, I often find that peoples that complain about being discriminated against are often far more racist than the people that they complain about.

[thaibeachlovers]

Unfortunately Jing it would appear you are the one trying to justify your 'rooted' thoughts by claiming it applies to all, good luck!

I concur with Jingthing.

We may have physically left the caves thousands of years ago, but our genetic make up is hard wired tribal in nature.

[StreetCowboy]

What about the thread about Thais not wearing sunglasses to protect their eyes when riding motorbikes - and one member said - it because they have slanted eyes - or something of that sort. Isn't that kind of racist (post number 17 0 by Krisb) ? I certainly think so.

Are people here ironicists?

SC

[advancebooking]

nothing wrong with racism....80% of the population of the world would agree with me and the other 20% would be too frightened to admit it in case the PC brigade outed them causing them to lose their job and social standing

There should be a button on thaivisa enabled as 'Redneck'. I could then press the redneck button after reading comments like this as it certainly applies to nattydread in this case. Having bias views towards folk just because of their different skin colour is stupid and only someone uneducated growing up in a redneck family could write a comment above...

[Neeranam]

My view is that all humans are racist. Everywhere. It's a matter of degree and severity and harm done, if any. I think we are hard wired for racism as a species. So the answer: simply yes.

Yes there it plenty of overt racist expression here but I would say the majority of communication here is not overtly racist and the average/typical level of racism of foreigners in Thailand regarding Thai people is moderate and not very toxic.

Foreigners aren't necessarily living in Thailand because they are especially fond of Thai people in general. Is that an immigration requirement?

I see a lot of racism towards Thais by expat/sexpat. I also see a lot of racism from Thais towards expat. However, the racism from expat/sexpat towards Thai is a lot worse because we are in the foreign country yet many of us feel superior to Thais. There is a lack of accepting cultural differences by many and quite frankly, I'm sick of hearing 'farang' insulting Thais in general. It tells me a lot about the person when saying things like "Thai people are stupid", "Thai women are ....", "Thai men are ..." etc.

[bonobo]

What about the thread about Thais not wearing sunglasses to protect their eyes when riding motorbikes - and one member said - it because they have slanted eyes - or something of that sort. Isn't that kind of racist (post number 17 0 by Krisb) ? I certainly think so.

Depends on the intent of the person making the post. If someone notes that darker skin is an adaptation of increased eumelanin-producing melanocytes to protect the body from too much sun, and lighter skin is a result of fewer eumelanin-producing melanocytes to allow more Vitamin D absorption, is that racist or just noting a commonly accepted biological theory? There are a number or proponents to the theory that the epicanthic eye fold common in many Asian peoples is an adaptation to protect from the wind and loess particles. If this is the case, then mentioning that Thais might not deed sunglasses while riding a motorcycle because they have "slanted eyes" could be an observation in line with the most accepted theory. (The epicanthic fold is also prevalent in central and northern Africa, which has the same type of winds and in Scandinavian countries, where wind-driven snow could have been the trigger for this development--well, that and protecting the eyes from sunlight bouncing off the snow, I would guess.)

So was the comment racist? I think it was or wasn't depending on the intent of the poster.

[StreetCowboy]

What about the thread about Thais not wearing sunglasses to protect their eyes when riding motorbikes - and one member said - it because they have slanted eyes - or something of that sort. Isn't that kind of racist (post number 17 0 by Krisb) ? I certainly think so.

Depends on the intent of the person making the post. If someone notes that darker skin is an adaptation of increased eumelanin-producing melanocytes to protect the body from too much sun, and lighter skin is a result of fewer eumelanin-producing melanocytes to allow more Vitamin D absorption, is that racist or just noting a commonly accepted biological theory? There are a number or proponents to the theory that the epicanthic eye fold common in many Asian peoples is an adaptation to protect from the wind and loess particles. If this is the case, then mentioning that Thais might not deed sunglasses while riding a motorcycle because they have "slanted eyes" could be an observation in line with the most accepted theory. (The epicanthic fold is also prevalent in central and northern Africa, which has the same type of winds and in Scandinavian countries, where wind-driven snow could have been the trigger for this development--well, that and protecting the eyes from sunlight bouncing off the snow, I would guess.)

So was the comment racist? I think it was or wasn't depending on the intent of the poster.

Well, you would say that- you're a monkey

SC

[Neeranam]

What about the thread about Thais not wearing sunglasses to protect their eyes when riding motorbikes - and one member said - it because they have slanted eyes - or something of that sort. Isn't that kind of racist (post number 17 0 by Krisb) ? I certainly think so.

Depends on the intent of the person making the post. If someone notes that darker skin is an adaptation of increased eumelanin-producing melanocytes to protect the body from too much sun, and lighter skin is a result of fewer eumelanin-producing melanocytes to allow more Vitamin D absorption, is that racist or just noting a commonly accepted biological theory? There are a number or proponents to the theory that the epicanthic eye fold common in many Asian peoples is an adaptation to protect from the wind and loess particles. If this is the case, then mentioning that Thais might not deed sunglasses while riding a motorcycle because they have "slanted eyes" could be an observation in line with the most accepted theory. (The epicanthic fold is also prevalent in central and northern Africa, which has the same type of winds and in Scandinavian countries, where wind-driven snow could have been the trigger for this development--well, that and protecting the eyes from sunlight bouncing off the snow, I would guess.)

So was the comment racist? I think it was or wasn't depending on the intent of the poster.

Well, you would say that- you're a monkey

SC

Apes are not monkeys.

[StreetCowboy]

What about the thread about Thais not wearing sunglasses to protect their eyes when riding motorbikes - and one member said - it because they have slanted eyes - or something of that sort. Isn't that kind of racist (post number 17 0 by Krisb) ? I certainly think so.

Depends on the intent of the person making the post. If someone notes that darker skin is an adaptation of increased eumelanin-producing melanocytes to protect the body from too much sun, and lighter skin is a result of fewer eumelanin-producing melanocytes to allow more Vitamin D absorption, is that racist or just noting a commonly accepted biological theory? There are a number or proponents to the theory that the epicanthic eye fold common in many Asian peoples is an adaptation to protect from the wind and loess particles. If this is the case, then mentioning that Thais might not deed sunglasses while riding a motorcycle because they have "slanted eyes" could be an observation in line with the most accepted theory. (The epicanthic fold is also prevalent in central and northern Africa, which has the same type of winds and in Scandinavian countries, where wind-driven snow could have been the trigger for this development--well, that and protecting the eyes from sunlight bouncing off the snow, I would guess.)

So was the comment racist? I think it was or wasn't depending on the intent of the poster.

Well, you would say that- you're a monkey

SC

Apes are not monkeys.

Most racists are pretty indiscriminate in their prejudice. Next thing you'll be expecting us to discern fifty shades of grey and forty shades of green

Not that I'm bothered, I'm colour-blind

SC

[HeijoshinCool]

There can be two meanings even when saying exactly the same thing. It all has to do with intent. Good friends can say outrageous things to each other and both just laugh. But, if a stranger were to say the same thing with a sneer there would be a battle. One black American can jokingly use the "N" word to another of his group, but if a white person were to say the same thing then all hell could break loose. There have been many discussions on thaivisa about the word "farang" and how it is used, and what is meant by when a Thai uses it. There are a few who adamantly think it is a rascist word, and yet others (including myself) just think it is a general term used to cover all of us with white skin and a caucasian background.

Well, just like the "N" word, farang can be benign, or it can be very racist. Context is everything.

[ravip]

ALL human beings are racists by default. Some can 'hide' their feelings and attack their victim in a subtle manner while others call a spade a spade openly without any diplomacy.

Most of the time a being who refers to another as stupid (or other derogatory term) are worse in that sense than whom they are accusing of.

The truth is bitter - utterly bitter. Very difficult to accept.

[chiangmaikelly]

ALL human beings are racist by default. Some can 'hide' their feelings and attack their victim in a subtle manner while others call a spade a spade openly without any diplomacy.

Most of the time a being who refers to another as stupid (or other derogatory term) are worse in that sense than whom they are accusing of.

The truth is bitter - utterly bitter. Very difficult to accept.

As a infant I was breast fed by a black woman for two years. It is very difficult for me to think bad thoughts about black women. I could go into my early experience with Asian women but suffice it to say I really doubt I am a racist or was by default. My mother was; my father was not. I don't find the truth difficult to accept.

[ravip]

ALL human beings are racist by default. Some can 'hide' their feelings and attack their victim in a subtle manner while others call a spade a spade openly without any diplomacy.

Most of the time a being who refers to another as stupid (or other derogatory term) are worse in that sense than whom they are accusing of.

The truth is bitter - utterly bitter. Very difficult to accept.

As a infant I was breast fed by a black woman for two years. It is very difficult for me to think bad thoughts about black women. I could go into my early experience with Asian women but suffice it to say I really doubt I am a racist or was by default. My mother was; my father was not. I don't find the truth difficult to accept.

I guess you belong to the minority that are an exception in this world!

(Exceptions exists in all situations)

I salute you for your brevity in stating the truth.

[MrRealDeal]

The medical articles and studies would answer all those questions better than me ..... I found them quite interesting just google "is racism inate" I don't agree or disagree with them I was just pointing out that Jing's beliefs are shared amoung some very sophistacated research Scientists.

From what I can gather there is apparently some reaction in the area of the brain where the 'inate' reactiveness is stored when a person is confronted by another race, what is not said is that the same effect would not be recreated when a person meets a lion or alligator for example; in my opinion we may well be hard wired in such a way that inate reactions are stimulated by certain events, but not conclusive on the inate racism front, the reaction could be for any out of group meeting, thus at the point of inate reaction we are doing no more than recognising the out of group experience.

I have a few problems with that study myself , namely how would you know it's inate by testing adults who's reactions would be determined by their experiences , but I am not a the Scientist doing the study and I'm sure they would have an explanation ..... my only point was that people were a little harsh on Jing

I think you could reproduce the same set of MRI brain respnces for a number of things like the one you mentioned , I would imagine a bland vegetable would produce one and a hot pepper another .... it wouldn't mean we are intaely disturbed by hot peppers only that the subjects had tasted both of those things. I would use the same logic on their brain responces to racism irespective ot their personal beliefs that they are not racist. My conclution would not be that it's intate , it's that the subject is more racist or disturbed by the imigaes than he was willing to admit to the person testing him.

I think the study we are refering to, is a better judge of one's honesty than on the inateness of racism. Now if they did the study on people locked in closets fed by robots all thier life I would have another opinion.

[Jingthing]

A Jew and a Puerto Rican apply for a job as accountant in the U.S.. Both have the exact same qualifications and both seem like they would fit in well into the work environment. The Puerto Rican might get the job but there isn't an interviewer alive who wouldn't THINK about the ethnic background of the two applicants in making their decision. Do the math.

[chiangmaikelly]

A Jew and a Puerto Rican apply for a job as accountant in the U.S.. Both have the exact same qualifications and both seem like they would fit in well into the work environment. The Puerto Rican might get the job but there isn't an interviewer alive who wouldn't THINK about the ethnic background of the two applicants in making their decision. Do the math.

You were never in the Army eh?

[Jingthing]

A Jew and a Puerto Rican apply for a job as accountant in the U.S.. Both have the exact same qualifications and both seem like they would fit in well into the work environment. The Puerto Rican might get the job but there isn't an interviewer alive who wouldn't THINK about the ethnic background of the two applicants in making their decision. Do the math.

You were never in the Army eh?

Much call for accountants in the army? I think I get your point though. The U.S. army has been over time a very positive force furthering racial social equality. Other than that, I don't get your point. The interviewers WOULD think about it.

This reminds me of Stephen Colbert's funny schtick, "I don't see color", yeah, right!

[chiangmaikelly]

A Jew and a Puerto Rican apply for a job as accountant in the U.S.. Both have the exact same qualifications and both seem like they would fit in well into the work environment. The Puerto Rican might get the job but there isn't an interviewer alive who wouldn't THINK about the ethnic background of the two applicants in making their decision. Do the math.

You were never in the Army eh?

Much call for accountants in the army? I think I get your point though. The U.S. army has been over time a very positive force furthering racial social equality. Other than that, I don't get your point. The interviewers WOULD think about it.

This reminds me of Stephen Colbert's funny schtick, "I don't see color", yeah, right!

A lot of accounts in the Army. IG Inspector General. Bean counters to a man. They have more useless rules and regulations and paperwork than any other organization in the world. There were times when I would have sworn that 50% of the Army were inspectors, accountants. If anything the Army would pick the opposite of a stereotype to do a job just to be cantankerous. My accountant was a black guy from Panama. The only Jewish guy I knew was the flight surgeons assistant who had been an undertaker before being drafted. He kept asking us to breath slower when he examined us.

[MrRealDeal]

Their is such a need to Accounting Officers in the Navy that they take college grads that have never been to boot camp or have any association at all , give them a 2 week course on how to Salute and some basic things and make them Officers ! .... I asked one how the "real" officers treat them , they guy I talked to said it was no problem and they didn't seem to care.

[Neeranam]

A Jew and a Puerto Rican apply for a job as accountant in the U.S.. Both have the exact same qualifications and both seem like they would fit in well into the work environment. The Puerto Rican might get the job but there isn't an interviewer alive who wouldn't THINK about the ethnic background of the two applicants in making their decision. Do the math.

Excuse my US ignorance but which one would the American, who was racist, be more inclined to choose?

[StreetCowboy]

A Jew and a Puerto Rican apply for a job as accountant in the U.S.. Both have the exact same qualifications and both seem like they would fit in well into the work environment. The Puerto Rican might get the job but there isn't an interviewer alive who wouldn't THINK about the ethnic background of the two applicants in making their decision. Do the math.

Excuse my US ignorance but which one would the American, who was racist, be more inclined to choose?

It would depend on whether the American was Puerto Rican or Jewish

[MrRealDeal]

I don't think a person deciding if a Jew or a Cuban is a better fit for his company means that he nesessarily feels one is superior to the other or one is inferior to the other based on race or that either or both are superior to his race , which would be racist , only that he is considering all the differences.

Thinking about obvious differences and thinking those make someone inferior are a loooooooong ways apart.

[MrRealDeal]

A Jew and a Puerto Rican apply for a job as accountant in the U.S.. Both have the exact same qualifications and both seem like they would fit in well into the work environment. The Puerto Rican might get the job but there isn't an interviewer alive who wouldn't THINK about the ethnic background of the two applicants in making their decision. Do the math.

Excuse my US ignorance but which one would the American, who was racist, be more inclined to choose?

Since they are looking for an account the Jew, a racist American person would think Jews are good with money and Puerto Ricans are not.

Jing would know better than I, but I think that comes from some period in time where Banking was one of the few jobs Jews were allowed to have someplace at some time in history. Or at least I heard that once from someone.

[Chicog]

I wouldn't call it racism, it's more xenophobia, and it's a two way street in Thailand.

Although some people just take a little bit of criticism and lace it with faux indignation.

[StreetCowboy]

I don't think a person deciding if a Jew or a Cuban is a better fit for his company means that he nesessarily feels one is superior to the other or one is inferior to the other based on race or that either or both are superior to his race , which would be racist , only that he is considering all the differences.

Thinking about obvious differences and thinking those make someone inferior are a loooooooong ways apart.

I think racism is really about judging people on the basis of stereotypes rather than an interview.

I would never employ a black person because they're stupid.

"But look - he's got a PhD from Harvard"

"Well, why would I want a forger on my staff?"

SC

[chiangmaikelly]

A Jew and a Puerto Rican apply for a job as accountant in the U.S.. Both have the exact same qualifications and both seem like they would fit in well into the work environment. The Puerto Rican might get the job but there isn't an interviewer alive who wouldn't THINK about the ethnic background of the two applicants in making their decision. Do the math.

Excuse my US ignorance but which one would the American, who was racist, be more inclined to choose?

Since they are looking for an account the Jew, a racist American person would think Jews are good with money and Puerto Ricans are not.

Jing would know better than I, but I think that comes from some period in time where Banking was one of the few jobs Jews were allowed to have someplace at some time in history. Or at least I heard that once from someone.

Christians could not charge interest it was against the usury laws during the middle ages.

[simple1]

A Jew and a Puerto Rican apply for a job as accountant in the U.S.. Both have the exact same qualifications and both seem like they would fit in well into the work environment. The Puerto Rican might get the job but there isn't an interviewer alive who wouldn't THINK about the ethnic background of the two applicants in making their decision. Do the math.

You were never in the Army eh?

Much call for accountants in the army? I think I get your point though. The U.S. army has been over time a very positive force furthering racial social equality. Other than that, I don't get your point. The interviewers WOULD think about it.

This reminds me of Stephen Colbert's funny schtick, "I don't see color", yeah, right!

I used to work for multinational companies & obviously dealt with HR professionals for different reasons. You may be correct that difference in race/ethnicity would happen on the subconscious level, but absolutely disagree it would generally be a conscious thought process. All down to the experience and capability to grow with the company across differing levels of management. Might be a wholly different matter if some SME company in the suburbs of London or N.Y.

[MrRealDeal]

A Jew and a Puerto Rican apply for a job as accountant in the U.S.. Both have the exact same qualifications and both seem like they would fit in well into the work environment. The Puerto Rican might get the job but there isn't an interviewer alive who wouldn't THINK about the ethnic background of the two applicants in making their decision. Do the math.

Excuse my US ignorance but which one would the American, who was racist, be more inclined to choose?

Since they are looking for an account the Jew, a racist American person would think Jews are good with money and Puerto Ricans are not.

Jing would know better than I, but I think that comes from some period in time where Banking was one of the few jobs Jews were allowed to have someplace at some time in history. Or at least I heard that once from someone.

Christians could not charge interest it was against the usury laws during the middle ages.

So it has more to do with Christians regulating themselves out of the Job than Jews being "forced" to do it ? thankx for the explanation I knew their was some kind of truth to it.

I think what I was told was that their were only a select number of jobs Jews were allowed to have and Banking was one of them is that part true ?

[pxlgirl]

I really don't get the whole racist discussion anyway, as the word "race" isn't even a scientific term. Even though humans ethnics differ depending on where they're located on this planet, there are no genetical differences between them. Craig Venter is one of the first biologists who has sequenced the human genome and made his point quite clear, quote:

"Race is a social concept. It's not a scientific one. There are no bright lines (that would stand out), if we could compare all the sequenced genomes of everyone on the planet." "When we try to apply science to try to sort out these social differences, it all falls apart."

The term "intelligence" is relative and it depends on a whole bunch of different factors and conditions. It can't be applied to some specific ethnic group nor does just one particular definition apply. Just like most sane people, we do have certain values in common that we use to mesure whether to classify people as those we get along with, and those we don't, regardless who they are or where they come from.

[StreetCowboy]

I really don't get the whole racist discussion anyway, as the word "race" isn't even a scientific term. Even though humans ethnics differ depending on where they're located on this planet, there are no genetical differences between them. Craig Venter is one of the first biologists who has sequenced the human genome and made his point quite clear, quote:

"Race is a social concept. It's not a scientific one. There are no bright lines (that would stand out), if we could compare all the sequenced genomes of everyone on the planet." "When we try to apply science to try to sort out these social differences, it all falls apart."

The term "intelligence" is relative and it depends on a whole bunch of different factors and conditions. It can't be applied to some specific ethnic group nor does just one particular definition apply. Just like most sane people, we do have certain values in common that we use to mesure whether to classify people as those we get along with, and those we don't, regardless who they are or where they come from.

Regardless of whether you believe in God, it's hard to deny the existence of religion. So why do you believe that race is a necessary requirement of racism?

Racism is not based on racial differences. It's based on perceptions of racial difference. SO you might say that "English" is not a race, and you might even believe it, but you;'ll be struggling to convince me that there's anything acceptable about sassenachs

SC