• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Offensive Halloween Costume

Is a band of white guys dressing as a mariachi band offensive?

  • Yes

    Votes: 40 14.5%
  • No

    Votes: 236 85.5%

  • Total voters
    276
Status
Not open for further replies.
So as as a 3rd generation Irish-American who grew up poor (food stamps and government cheese poor, not quite on welfare poor) my life has been defined by those who cheated sharecroppers and infected Native Americans with small pox? Neither your cartoon nor your explanation of power structures apply to the circumstances under which I came to adulthood, but I'm supposed to feel guilt over my "white privilege?" As most people try to do, I have improved my circumstances in life over that of my parents and am trying to do the same for my children. Haves and have nots are not defined by skin color. Humor being okay if it pokes at a position of power that can stand to be taken down a few pegs, but not okay if it pokes fun at those in a lesser position is hypocracy. Climb down off your high horse before you get a nosebleed.

No, see, that's the thing, you can't take this personally. White privilige has naught to do with work ethic. How long will it take to undo generataions of societal codes and laws, which were overturned in the 60s - by law - not by society at large - that discriminated against American minorities? It's not up to you unfortunately.
 
. There is no 'reverse racism'.
!

W,T,F,?

8b233ab81953df0af2228181eae9bcb2.jpg
 
I'll leave this here. I hope you take the time to learn. I'm struggling with this still. It's very difficult for sure.

7 reasons why reverse racism doesn't exist


This is a tough read, but I find myself nodding to a lot stuff here and realizing 'yeah, I react like this sometimes'.

Invalid Link Removed


Racism not on a perosnal level, or person to person - Invalid Link Removed
 
Last edited:
I like when a Mariachi band uses a tuba for a bass. I also like the Mexican guitarrón which is the really big guitar. Both are great. I like bass stuff.
I used to work in a music store and once a week this Hispanic kid (maybe 13 years old or so) would come in, grab a right-handed classical guitar, flip it to play left-handed, and destroy our minds with traditional Mariachi guitar.
He was amazing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GregT
The point is, he's not putting on a "high hat," he's putting on 6+ years of in depth study. Of course he should be challenged - everyone and everything should be challenged - but you do not nullify his points merely by challenging them.

You wouldn't go up to a physics professor and insist that just because of all his highfalutin booklernin he can't presuppose to preach the gospel truth about gravity. Why I've seen water flow uphill at the Mystery Spot! Explain that!

I understand that YOUR point was your incredulity at the existence of the social sciences themselves. But again, Asimov's response would be that your incredulity is somewhat meaningless compared to the mountain of human endeavors that have been carried out in their pursuit. You can't disprove the pyramids by raising your eyebrows.

By all means, challenge the social sciences. Hell, go out and prove that they shouldn't be considered sciences in the first place. But you're not going to do it in a paragraph, and I think your half-cocked eyebrow will be awfully tired before your done.


I don't know where you're getting half of the assertions you're making about what you seem to think I was saying to my academic friend. He, oddly enough, doesn't seem to be interpreting or taking what I actually was saying anywhere near what you're reading into it - or the extremes you're taking it to. Nor is he putting words in my mouth like you seem to be trying to do.

How you got from my taking a jab at academics for some of their excesses; an appeal for some courtesy and understanding in uncomfortable social situations on the part of all of us; and a cautionary comment regarding allowing the rightness of your cause to overwhelm you into seeing agendas and enemies everywhere - to your suggesting I have no respect for the social sciences - and that I'm dismissing everything human civilization has worked towards - is a feat of mental gymnastics well beyond my ability to follow. Which is why I said I think I'm missing something here. Or possibly you are.

If you go back and read our back and forth (there were multiple posts), you might get a better idea of what each of us were actually saying. I think you'll notice we're either at (or close to) a consensus on several key points. And we now both understand each other a little better, and have a greater respect for each other's position, as a result.


----

note: regarding not challenging physics professors... that's not a good example to use since physicists routinely throw out a good portion of "established" knowledge each year as new discoveries (most recently 'dark matter') force them to completely rethink their positions. As MIT's Marvin Minsky put it: Hit the basics hard - and keep an open mind. Because around 80% of what you're learning today will turn out to be completely wrong 20 years from now.

Physics instructors not only expect to be challenged, they actively encourage it in their classes. At least in the physics classes I've been in. Would that the social sciences had the same degree of humility and open mindedness that the so-called 'hard sciences' do.

But that's a topic for another day.
 
So, unable to respond coherently to my point, you instead construct a series of strawmen and move the goalposts (if I may mix metaphors).
Those aren't metaphors, they're logical fallacies. I think you're due for a trip here:

Link Removed

I could easily accuse you of both as well, and also throw in the texas sharpshooter (since you can think of or find someone who doesn't feel oppressed, no one must be oppressed).

You didn't just say that Mexicans have sometimes been victimized, you sought to render them absolute victims by saying that they've been scrapping the bottom for 500 years. The distinction matters because your condescending attitude requires that you deprive those whose cause you claim to champion of agency of their own, thereby justifying your officiousness toward the rest of us. If Mexicans (and those in the USA of Mexican ancestry) are not the monolithic block of victims you wish to represent, but instead a diverse and complex group of people(s) with varying levels of power and privilege...well, you can't so easily assume the superiority that allows you to step in as their champion, can you?
I claim no superiority, and I'm no one's champion.

What you're missing is a sense of scale. On the scale of 500 years there is no way to talk about people or cultures as anything other than monolithic. And on that scale there is no other way to describe the treatment of indigenous Americans as anything other than as victims.

That doesn't mean that in that time there haven't been people who weren't victimized, or who found success in spite of it, but their stories do not change the fundamental nature of the relationship between the two cultures.
 
Thanks to ancestry.com and their DNA test I've confirmed that I have a line that goes back to the late 1630s-1640s, Barnstable MA, and before that back to England and Ireland. I'm even a descendant of a 16th century Scottish Lord that served in Parliament

All I can say is...

 
  • Like
Reactions: peledog
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts