Defending Rob Sherman
You will have no doubt heard that atheist activist Rob Sherman, the man who got shouted at by Illinois State Rep Monique Davis for being an atheist, has been named as the “Worst Person in the World” by Keith Olberman:
Rob Sherman’s crime? Calling Monique Davis a “negro” on his website. Now I don’t admit to knowing all of black history, and coming from England, a place where blacks have had freedom for many many years now, I obviously don’t have much experience with racism. However, it seems to me that the term “negro” is not racist when used in a perfectly legititmate context, such as referring to the oppression of black people or “negroes”. Why else would an organisation exist called the “United Negro College Fund”? If “negro” is such a racist slur, why haven’t the UNCF been prosecuted?
Anti-racism is a hypocritical social phenomenon. It is illegal and considered racial hatred for a white man to call a black man “nigger”, and yet the black community of rappers and even the youth tend to use the very same word to describe themselves and their friends. Racism cannot work like that, and it shouldn’t work like that. If a word is bad, it should be bad whoever uses it. Too often have I read stories of teachers being prosecuted for calling a student “nigger”, even if the student uses the word themselves, and often used the word towards the very same teacher. Too often have I read stories of people being accused of racism simply for insulting someone of a different race.
Only last year an English journalist was arrested for racially abusing her black neighbour. Did she call this woman a nigger? No. Did she call her a negro? No. She was arrested for calling a black woman a “bitch”. Pardon me for being inquisitive, but since when did a term meaning a female dog become a racist slur? It never has, and never will. It’s strange that anti-racism got so far to make sure people of different ethnic groups got the same freedoms, and yet fails so miserably by charging innocent people for making non racial statements. If I insult a white person, it’s abuse. If I insult a person of a different ethnic background, it’s racism.
Wake up world. Anti-racism is destroying society. It had good intentions, but the fact of the matter is every race is equal now, and all anti-racism is doing now is prosecuting people for being human. I don’t insult black people because they are black, I insult them because they are human and I disagree with whatever they were saying or doing, the same reason I insult white people.
Anti-racism is the new racism. FACT.
Rob Sherman wasn’t being racist, he was being human. He was making a point against racism and anti-racism. In a world where people are equal, those who used to be oppressed are usually the ones doing the oppressing. Martin Luther King Jr. didn’t want a world where blacks oppressed whites or had more political status than whites; he wanted a world where everyone was equal. People like Monique Davis would sicken Dr King. They stand for everything he wants in terms of ethinicity, but stand against everything he wants in terms of freedom.
If you want to call Rob Sherman racist or get him to apologise for using the term “negro”, that’s fine, but don’t be so blind as to leave it there. You should be fighting to get the UNCF to change their racist name, and for rappers to be prosecuted for using racist lyrics. To do otherwise is countermount to racism itself, and totally hypocritical.
Contact Adrian Hayter
My Facebook
My Atheist Nexus Page
My Twitter
My Reddit
My Atheist Spot
My FriendFeed
My Technorati
Atheist Forums
Loading ...
Perhaps I should state (before I get accused of being racist) that I am fully against any form of racism. Attacks, whether verbal or physical on members of a specific race because they are of that specific race are wrong, and should not be tolerated in society.
Just because I am against racism doesn’t mean I fully respect the way in which anti-racism is going though. To me, anti-racism is beginning to look more like the thing it is trying to prevent.
I’m with you 100% here. He could have used the term “African American” or he could have used “Negro”. They both mean the same and have the same context. His opinion on his website was no where near the hate-filled ramblings of Monique Davis.
I think anti-rasicm is part of the political correctness movement that is chewing on daily life in Europe and destroying the fundement of Western civilization in general.
Context is what makes a word – any word – rasist or not. Look at these two sentences:
“Chris Rock is one cool negro.”
and
“Colin Powell, that negro, is in part responsible for the war in Iraq.”
In which of these sentences is ‘negro’ used in a racist way?
Correct.
And how can you tell?
Exactly; context.
You guys have no sense of race relations in Chicago.
A congressman from Kentucky called Obama a “boy” who should not have his hand on the button. He apologized a day later. Why?
When white people especially white men patronize people of color with words like negro or boy there is a patronizing sense to it because of the legacy of Jim crow.
Out of all of the possible options like black or african-american why would you choose a dated term like negro from negroid=associated with inferiority because it was not white?
What a fool.
serrano,
You’ve just outlined the problem we are talking about. Calling Obama a “boy” is perfectly fine because in comparative terms, he is a young man (the youngest candidate even). What the congressman probably meant (although I have no evidence to back this up) is that Obama is too young to be a president. We’ve had similar arguments in this country when Tony Blair came to power, and when David Cameron was elected leader of the Conservative party.
True, Sherman could have said “black” or “african-american”, but I doubt it would have made a difference. He would still have been called a racist for “discriminating” against a certain racial group, when all he was doing was making a valid point. If you think the word “negro” is associated with inferiority, why don’t you go and sue the United Negro College Fund…
Calling a grown man a boy “is perfectly fine”? Are you stupid?
Second, this is what Mr. Sherman wrote on his website:
“Now that Negroes like Representative Monique Davis have political power, it seems that they have no problem at all with discrimination, just as long as it isn’t them who are being discriminated against.”
The racist point isn’t the use of the word ‘Negro’ even though some people find them offensive. Sherman’s despicable racism derives from his claim that “Negroes” have now embraced “discrimination” as long as they’re not the victims. There is no evidence for that assertion. Do not defend this kind of stupidity just because you agree with Mr. Sherman on whether God exists or not. I am an atheist and I find his comments distasteful and your defense of it idiotic.
Jack,
Did you not read the bit about “comparative terms”? Compared to many politicians going for the top job, Obama is very young, and therefore calling him a “boy” is valid for the context the comment is in. I doubt the congressman meant it in terms of actual age or race, he meant it in terms of the relative age of the candidates. Obama is the “boy” in this election, whether you like the term or not.
I think you’ll actually find that the entire blogging and news community will disagree with you on your second point. As far as I can tell from the various reports, the racist issue is with the word “negro”. Even if what you claim was the truth, it wouldn’t make it racist. Sherman was outlining the fact that a black woman in a position of power had discriminated against an atheist, when years ago she would have been discriminated against. There are thousands of black Americans like her, and numerous reports on “Black Power” groups that are discriminating against white people, merely because they are now in a position of power. I suggest you look at Louis Theroux’s documentary on “Black Power” groups if you want evidence.
Finally, please don’t suggest that I am only doing this because Sherman is an atheist like myself; you have no evidence to suggest this. If you even knew me you would know my position on these kind of issues has not wavered in the past 3 years. I have always been against racism, but have recently seen the hypocrisy that is anti-racism, and how they are both working in sync to destroy society. Racism needs to be stamped out, and accusing people of being racist when they aren’t is only making the situation worse.
To Adrian Hayter:
You are incorrect on a few issues,
#1. Inequality, whether you acknowledge it or not, still remains an issue to this day. If you think that this country has gotten past this burning issue of the past few hundred years, you are sadly misinformed.
#2. Rob Sherman using the term ‘negro’ in the context that he did, again, whether you acknowledge it or not, was hypocritical in nature as well a weak accusation that made use of a term that can be interpreted as a racist statement in the current status quo because, as Serrano pointed out, it is outdated and was derived from the jargon of a notorious racist.
I believe that Jack Donner explained it quite articulately, but just in case you missed it, he is saying the meaning of what Rob Sherman said can be misinterpreted rather easily as racist because of his use of an outdated term and stereo-type of an entire race that is only founded on HIS personal experience (bias) and no hard evidence (subjective; unfounded). Get it now?
#3. I get what you are trying to say about the movement towards Political Correct media being carried away down a line of extremists, who abuse the trend to make a scene. I get it… but you are totally disrespecting the idea of anti-racism; aka equality (which you claim that we have reached?) and men like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X, Thurgood Marshall, and women like Rosa Parks, who fought for their right to be equal in society. You belittle the idea they fought for by calling it racism itself.
Aaron,
#1. Perhaps inequality exists where you come from, but in England I do not see inequality, I see equality. People here see beyond race, religion, etc. I know that in America this is quite different. Atheists like myself know too well that the entire government is Christian, and yet following a secular mandate. It’s semi-equality at best. Even today, a black man has a very good chance of becoming the next POTUS. If that doesn’t show equality, I don’t know what does.
#2. No I do not “get it”. I fail to see why Rob Sherman’s usage of the word “negro” as a word he had used in the past does not contradict that of the United Negro College Fund, an official organisation. If a word really is that offensive, what gives one group of people the right to use it inoffensively and accuse anyone else of being racist?
#3. If you think I am belittling the ideas that MLK and Rosa Parks fought for then you didn’t quite get what I was saying. I think the ideas were great, they were revolutionary, and they were right. I think that we have fought for them well, but when you start to use the same ideas to accuse someone of racism when all they do is say something non-discriminatory against someone of a different race, it becomes hypocritical.
If I called a black person a “nigger” then I am being racist. If I call them a “bastard” I am being insulting. People tend to mix the two up. Throwing an insult at someone is not a crime unless the insult itself is racist. In effect, modern anti-racism is trying to stop people from being human. Let us have the freedom to insult whoever we want without looking at which country or background they come from!
Wait, what? Historical context has a bearing on what is and is not considered appropriate speech? SHOCKING! It must be a conspiracy to squash free expression!
You’re right about one thing, Adrian. As an Englishman, you clearly have no clue about race relations in America. About the only thing you have right is that intent matters; however, you miss that certain words are closely associated by their historical usage with racist intent.
“Boy” is one of those words. Yes, it technically just means a young person. However, historically speaking, it is a word that has been used to denigrate black men by equating them to children. Most importantly, a congressman from fucking KENTUCKY knows damned well what he means when he calls a black man “boy”, and it has absolutely nothing to do with relative ages. I’d expect you, perhaps, to be ignorant of that historically contingent meeting, but somebody from the Southern US can’t help but be aware of it.
To pretend that words don’t have history is to be completely ignorant of how human language works.
And anti-racism isn’t the new racism. RACISM is the new racism.