CTA Tattler

I guess anywhere that ethnicity isn't specified, we should read "white dude ... snorted crack" or "white passenger waving knife".

I imagine I talk like that too, but it somehow popped out at me that when weird things involved blacks and Vietnamese, it was mentioned, but in the other incidents, nothing was. Is this how we come to see white people as different? -- the weirdos who are black are seen as exotic weird and black, while the weirdos that are white are seen simply as weirdos - different from us.

Again, I believe I do the same thing. I'm not trying to be harsh. It just popped out at me in reading these anecdotes.

damn racist high school kids. They should know better. This is the PC age. At 15, you should already know it's not vietnamese, it's asian-american person. These are people of color, for god's sake, not ethnic people!
Give the kid a break.

Like father, like daughter. Racist.

That wasn't crack little girl...

What about this was racist exactly?

Well if the girl is white then it makes sense for her to specify if the person is Black or Viet. The opposite would be true if the girl wasn't white.

Chris,
Just the mere mention of "black" or "vietnamese" is racist. And apparently the lack of mentioning a race is racist as well.
Of course I am being sarcastic as I think faulting the 15 year old for being "racist" is ridiculous.

If she was older I might get into all of this "necessity of describing race" stuff. But she's a kid. So...

And at the risk of taking this thread further off topic...

Well if the girl is white then it makes sense for her to specify if the person is Black or Viet.

Why?

While all of you have run with your own fantasies about what I wrote, it might be worth pointing out that I didn't call her racist. And I explicitly stated I do the same thing.

But it is odd, and it does have the unintentional cumulative effect of emphasizing the racist idea of "normal white folks", as a definitely racist white guy I once knew would frequently say, his very conscious idea being that white folks were the norm to be measured against.

Another thing that I think is strange is that if you mention the idea of a racial effect, a dozen people instantly spring up angrily and sarcastically saying you've wrongly charged someone with being racist. Why do defensive, people?

Dude, I ride the Red Line every day, and I never see stuff like this. How am I missing it? The weirdest thing I've ever seen wasn't even that weird - just a bunch of drunk kids singing show tunes.

"Dude, I ride the Red Line every day, and I never see stuff like this. How am I missing it? "

Hmmm.. well, if you look to your left and don't see any weird people, and look to your right and don't see any weird people, and there are ALWAYS weird people on the train, then that means...."

Just kidding, I think.

ames said: "The weirdest thing I've ever seen wasn't even that weird - just a bunch of drunk kids singing show tunes."

That was prpbably me. Sorry about that! :-D

While I don't think there was any attempt to be racist in the post, and it is understandable that differences are pointed out, while commonalities are ignored, I too was struck by the multiple mentioning of race and ethnicity.

Why? Because, for the most part, the race or ethnic factor wasn't relevant.

The woman with sideburns is amusing whether or not she's Black. The guy "lubing" his dentures is just as gross no matter what his apparent ethnicity is.

On the other hand, the people wearing lederhosen and dirndls might have been funnier if they had been Black or Vietnamese.

I was also struck by how so many of these people were "old", but of course we're talking about someone who's probably younger than almost everyone traveling alone.

The agism is typical for kids (as is the inherient agism in me saying that), but I was struck by the apparent need to point out race and ethnicity when it was largely irrelevant.

Descriptions that go that deep are fine if you're writing a novel, and are trying to set a scene. But these were text messages -- a medium where economy of words is a top priority! So why all the unnecessary race and ethnic descriptors?

I don't want to come down too hard on one girl. Nor do I want to make some arguement that she's just reflecting her parents. No, the issue is far wider in scope than that.

Rosie O'Donnell has complained that when people want to insult her, they always seem to go for the "fat" first. It's probably obvious why. She *is* fat. And when we start describing people, we often go for the things we see -- usually the differences -- first.

Gender, age, race/ethnicity (although usually only when different), weight, language/dialect/accent. Things like that. It happens. It's human nature.

But what strikes me is when people automatically go for one of these when it's not relevant.

This is a chance for *all* of us to think about the times that we've immediately went to one of these differences, and seemed to elevate it from just part of an overall description, to imply that it had some relevance to the situation at hand.

For example, when you call someone a "crazy bitch", is it really relevant that the crazy person is female? And doesn't the bitch part of that pharse imply that this is a trait of all women?

Now look at those text messages again. By mentioning that the woman with sideburns is Black, what does that imply or infer? Is there not some underlying tone that the sideburns and her race are somehow related? And how does this reflect on other Black women?

My point is that if you're not writing long, rich character discriptions, the words you use to identify someone - especially the irrelevant ones - reflect your attitudes, concious or subconcious, more than they describe the person you're talking about.

It's not about being PC. It's about why this is so important to someone that it makes it into a text message that is limited to 160 characters.

Rusty, Ryan, couldn't agree more. White folks generally assume whiteness to be 'normal' and center that in how they think about the world. There's a real distinction between calling someone a racist, and noticing how race (and yes, racism) structures simple perceptions and communications like these. The way that people were identified (or not) by race was also the first thing I noticed about the post.

Can we take this out of the 'You're a racist'/'You're a PC fascist' tired game and use this as an opportunity to talk openly about how race, especially in a public place like the train, is perceived and communicated?

Good post, Rusty. My sentiments almost exactly.

On the other hand, the people wearing lederhosen and dirndls might have been funnier if they had been Black or Vietnamese.

This is true.

We live in the most segregated major city in America -- the odds of a given Chicagoan being at least unconsciously racist are pretty high. It's not about one person's individual moral failings, it's about the way things are structured.

Why do we live in the most segregated city in America? I think we are somewhat segregated, but that depends on your neighborhood. I live in Uptown, which has a very different mix from say Lincoln Park.

Everyone uses races as a descriptor. That doesn't make it racist necessarily. Don't throw rocks if you live in a glass house.

"Well if the girl is white then it makes sense for her to specify if the person is Black or Viet"

I meant that since she is White (which is normal to her) then it is understandable to mention other races. So if she was Black then she would say "White girl with beard" or "guy" in relation to a [Black guy].

Ugh too hard to explain. n/m

Can we go back to complaining about the CTA? :-)

====
Everyone uses races as a descriptor. That doesn't make it racist necessarily. Don't throw rocks if you live in a glass house.
====

Just because everyone does it doesn't make it right.

And while it may not be racist in the most active sense, it does mean that we're thinking of race.

Why "Black woman"? Why not "woman in red jacket"? Why "old Vietnamese man"? Why not "old guy in blue shirt"?

In the cases here, it really was irrelevant how they were described, so why go to race first? That's the real question.

If you were sending the same text messages, why would you choose to include a racial or ethnic description when it really didn't have any relevance to the situation.

The fact that "we all do it", and that it's almost automatic is a pretty good indication that while we sometimes talk a good game about diversity, we aren't yet walking the walk.

Breaking the habbit of using race/ethnicity unnecessarily in cases like this isn't going to be a magic bullet to end racism, but as long as "we all do it", (even those of us who don't think we're racists), it's an indication that racism is still alive and well.

I'm not saying you can never use a person's race or apparent ethnicity to desribe them. If you've got a room full of white people, and you're trying to point out the only Black person, it would be foolish not to use it. It would be just the same as if everyone in the room was wearing white, and there was one guy in a black suit.

And, of course, a bunch of Vietnamese in traditional German garb would be something worth mentioning the ethnicity. It wouldn't make sense without it. Ethnicity would be a relevant factor in describing that situation.

I'm not saying we shouldn't ever mention race or ethnicity. I'm just saying that when you find yourself just automatically doing it that you stop and think about whether it was relevant. And if it wasn't relevant, ask yourself why you did it. If you really aren't a racist, why did you just act like one?

When you find that you no longer mention race or ethnicity when it isn't relevant, then you can honestly say you're not racist. Until then, we're all just works in progress. (Or at least I hope we're rising to that minimum level.)

It's just an empirical fact: Chicago is the most racially segregated major city in America. I thought it was well known that this was the case. The existence of some mixed neighborhoods doesn't negate the overall reality.

Adam: You are absolutely right. This segregation is a known fact among Urban Planners too(myself being one of them). We do have some of the most diverse neighborhoods in the country, but the City, overall, is widely known as the most racially segregated in the U.S.

Where's the description of a white woman/man?? Oh wait, no one describes white people as white, only if you're not white will your race be put before your gender.

You don't snort crack from a pen cap. It was probably heroin or regular cocaine.

Actually, Chicago is the fourth most segregated city in the U.S. Just FYI.

Why is white girl all up in my grill and makin' fun o' my facial hair? My grandmamma had sideburns too.

Excuse me, but nobody jumped all over this 15 year old for describing an Eastern European man- no, instead some chose to automatically assume that the author is racist based on select parts of the post. Did it ever occur to you that she's trying to be descriptive so her father can picture what she's seeing?
Sorry if this irks you- actually, I'm not sorry- but if you don't know this person and you've determined that she's racist, you're as prejudiced as any REAL racist out there. Stop pointing fingers at other people and be a better person through leading by example.

Sounds a bit racist to me.

My god people give it a rest! Looking for racism everywhere?
According to the Aug 2008 Census Bureau:
whites-68%,
hispanic-15%
black-12%
asian-5%.

Ok, so now that we have established that this is a majority white nation (now),
wouldn't it make sense that the majority(white in this case) use a descriptive term to identify any non-white?

I don't think this young girl was being racist by any stretch of the imagination!

Goodness, this is why we CANNOT have an honest discussion about race, everyone has to watch EVERY single word they say.

"Quit looking for trouble, enough will find you on its own."