Story Highlights:
Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff directs employee to take leave
Man in prison outfit, dreadlocks and darkened skin make-up came to party
Party host was Julie Myers, head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement
She and other judges at first gave man praise for costume's "originality"
Source (http://edition.cnn.com/2007/US/11/06/ice.costume/index.html).

Gah, can you say HYPOCRISY?!

Also, what the hell? A black man in a convict suit is offensive, but a white one wouldn't be? This is wrong on so many levels I don't know where to start... bloody PC! :mad:

Well this is the epitome of ridiculousness....and, I agree, white skin would have been ok? This society is so ultra sensitive over what they perceive as racial issues -- it's like a hair-trigger set to go off. So bend over Ms Myers and join the crowd.

Also, what the hell? A black man in a convict suit is offensive, but a white one wouldn't be? This is wrong on so many levels I don't know where to start... bloody PC! :mad:It looked to me like the white guy in the convict suit went in black face...which, to be fair, would be racially charged.

What I meant was, if the guy was black and came dressed in a convict suit (admittedly unlikely), no one would say anything. If they guy was white and didn't paint his face, no one would even give it a second look. If the guy was black and painted his face white, I'm willing to bet no one would accuse him of being offensive. So it's just a white guy who can't dress up as a black con without getting fired. As if there was no such thing as black cons or if black cons were such an outrageous idea that you could get fired for bringing it up.

It's supposed to be a costume party, for Pete's sake! So everyone was supposed to make sure they didn't paint their face? I mean, heaven forbid that a black guy would paint his face white, think of all the mime outrage! :rolleyes:

Absurdity aside, I can understand how this could have been perceived as insensitive, but more than likely it wasn't even intentional. I'd say give the guy a warning if you have to. But fire him? For this? Good grief... will anyone over there dare put on a red nose again for fear of grievously insulting the professional clown community? You can label pretty much every costume offensive to someone.

This is wrong on so many levels I don't know where to start... bloody PC

Now, now, Tal, don't you know that PC is a liberal-only phenomena? The DHS is run by so-called conservatives, ergo it isn't PC. :p

To be fair, whites using makeup to, um, look black is very racially charged. It's where the phrase 'Jim Crow' comes from, after all.

Ok... I will try to be as polite as I can when I say this....but -- here's my view on it:

Blacks scream the racist card when they view other races singling them out for whatever reason -- essentially treating them differently than everyone else. But, in fact, they go to great lengths themselves to ostracize THEMSELVES, by separating themselves from the rest, wanting special priviledges, special notice, special commendations, etc.

At my university last week, they elected a Miss Black NSU. Do we have a Miss White NSU? or a Miss Hispanic NSU? Hell no. Are black women barred from the regular Miss NSU contest? Absolutely not. And there are any number of examples of this -- Black History Month. Do we have a White History Month? Hell no. Also...at our school, in the cafeteria....they isolate themselves from the whites ON PURPOSE. They are loud, make scenes....when other students are just trying to eat in peace. It seems it's ok for them to use the race card for their advantage, but when people comment on them AS THAT RACE, they get their feathers ruffled and twist comments to their advantage and ultimately demand an apology Enough is enough. I say they can't have it both ways,

I have to disagree with the "racially charged" nonsense. It was a costume party; people dress up to be something they're not. Would a man dressed as a woman or vice versa be "sexually charged"? Dressing up for a costume party in no way implies anything.

Obviously the guy didn't go around making a prick of himself intending to be offensive; that would have been a different story. The funniest thing about this kind of nonsense is that the majority of people thought it was fine and even "original" until they heard a few were offended. Then all of a sudden the costume was insensitive and inappropriate, and some people were "rightfully" offended by it.

IMO, people need to get a grip on themselves, stop taking things so seriously and enjoy the party.

Well, there's a lot of history in the US tied up in black face (none of it positive towards blacks) and there's also an extraordinarily severe discrepancy in the way the criminal justice system treats blacks vs the way it treats whites. Not only are the repeatedly unfairly profiled, but they also receive much stricter sentences than whites for the same crimes even when they have the same criminal record. The "all blacks are criminals" stereotype is a lot stronger than you think in the south, and even here in Iowa*. In taking offense to this idiot's (any American that didn't grow up under a rock that who wouldn't expect negative consequences for attending a party with his co-workers wearing a convict costume in black face is either a moron or hopelessly naive. Probably both.) costume choice, all these elements are at play. That said, I do believe that the folks that were offended had a right to be offended, but I don't think this idiot should be fired for it.

*This really shouldn't be surprising though. Iowa is often considered the worst place in the US to be black. The incarceration rate for blacks is around 12 times that of whites (the worst disparity in the country), primarily because blacks in Iowa get something in the area of 3 times the prison time as whites do for identical crimes with identical records.

Blacks scream the racist card when they view other races singling them out for whatever reason -- essentially treating them differently than everyone else. But, in fact, they go to great lengths themselves to ostracize THEMSELVES, by separating themselves from the rest, wanting special priviledges, special notice, special commendations, etc.

Couldn't agree more. And more importantly, welcome back Spelly! :wave: Haven't seen you around in a long while.

I can see both sides of this. I think a black man painting his face white with a bullwhip in hand would have also been offensive. There was a racial slight in the costume -- the guy could have gone as a white convict, just as a black guy could go as a black convict, with no offense. But once he chose to change his race for the costume, and depict that race in a negative way, it became a racial slight. Had he chosen to be George Washington Carver there would have been no problems.

On the other side... it was just a costume party... lighten up DHS.

Hi Aldeth! Nice to see you!:D

The "all blacks are criminals" stereotype is a lot stronger than you think in the south, and even here in Iowa...That said, I do believe that the folks that were offended had a right to be offended...I simply cannot agree with that. First, dressing up as a black convict for a Halloween party in and of itself makes no statement about "all blacks are criminals". The behavior of the costume wearer and the context for the costume IMO is what is important and dictates what statement is being made. One possible statement it makes in the context of a Halloween party is "some black convicts are scary", or even "I bet nobody will recognize me if I wear this costume". Unless the costume wearer was clearly making an offensive statement by wearing it, then in my opinion their offense is ridiculous.
But once he chose to change his race for the costume, and depict that race in a negative way, it became a racial slight.I don't agree. Again, context is what matters IMO, not simply the costume. In the context of a Halloween party, and given that most didn't consider it offensive (so obviously the guy wasn't trying to make an offensive statement) why should it be considered a racial slight? Again, the wearer may want to change race simply to make his disguise more effective.

IMO, people are just too willing these days to look at a situation in a negative light instead of a positive one which is sad. Why so easily offended? It just makes life miserable for everyone involved.

Well.. it is racist, isn't it?

Why did he feel the need to black himself up? Surely only to fit into the stereotype that black people are criminals. You couldn't get away with that here, either. if he didn't black himself up, he would've been fine. It was unnecessary to do it.

"Unnecessary" and "Racist". That's exactly what I'm talking about; so willing to take the worst view of a situation. So what if it was unnecessary? He won "most original" costume by doing so. Why are some people so overly sensitive to a Halloween costume, and really so overly sensitive about such a generalized topic as race? Unless the guy was up in the face of black people at the party implying that he represents all black people in the US, why should they be personally offended?

When I was a little kid, I remember my parents blacking me up to play a hobo. But then we called it just putting soot on to show dirt I guess. Wasn't meant to pertain to any race in particular.

I'm not offended by it. I couldn't give a rats bum, but it IS racist. Whether or not some people are overly sensitive or not, and choose to react or not, it doesn't matter. It's still immensely stupid to think you could go to a works do dressed as a black man in a convict outfit and not piss some people off. Sacking is a bit harsh, but I suppose it had to be done. There's no need to 'change your race' to better fit a certain thing. If you do that, then people are going to throw the racist card at you, and if it's in work environment, you'll face punishment. He must have been pretty thick to think he could get away with it.

I'm not saying that isn't the reality of the situation. I'm saying the reality is ridiculous.

There's no need to 'change your race' to better fit a certain thing. If you do that, then people are going to throw the racist card at you...I gave several plausible reasons why it would not have been a racist decision. And what does "need" have to do with anything? It made the costume better as evidenced by his winning the "most original" award.

I'm sure if I went to a works party dressed as a terrorist, but darken my skin up and adopt an Asian accent I might stand a chance of getting 'most original' outfit. It'd still be racist as you're bracketing based on race, whether jokingly, very lightly or whatever. I don't get what there is to argue against to be honest.

He'd probably get away with it anywhere else, but work is a different matter. I don't think that getting sacked due to this kind of thing in the workplace is ridiculous really. It's quite understandable.

I saw your reasons, but I don't agree with them. If the guy in question was black, he'd have been fine. If he just went dressed as a convict, he'd have been fine. I don't see how making himself black added anything to the 'outfit'. He made a conscious decision to change his appearance of race, because black people have a stereotypical reputation for criminality. That's a decision based on race, to that race's detriment - racism, no?

I don't know if I'm missing something here or what, but I'm afraid I don't 'get' the other side of the coin here...

Let's flip it a bit:

Supposed a black man had come into the party painted white, with a coon dog by his side and dressed like the stereotypical southern red necks. Do you think the white population would be screaming racist? Yet, by your definition, that's exactly what he is. Would he have been fired for doing this? Would apologies need to be made all around? The answer I think is "no". Because I don't feel that whites are as ultra sensitive about the race card, as blacks are. Everyone would have had a few laughs and gone on to enjoy the party.

I agree that it's racist, for all the reasons Barmy cited. To suggest this doesn't have a racist overtone is to suggest that racism no longer exists, and that is clearly not the case. IMO, the guy deserves what he got just for being such a dumb-ass that he wouldn't think this would cause a stir.

That's a decision based on race, to that race's detriment - racism, no?In what way is it to the entire race's detriment? Did he have a sign around his neck saying "Today's typical American black man"? No he didn't. The whole concept of a costume is to dress up as something you're not. He's not a black convict and thought it would be cool to masquerade as one. Does that make it a statement about all blacks? Not even close.
To suggest this doesn't have a racist overtone is to suggest that racism no longer exists, and that is clearly not the case.I completely disagree for all the reasons I've stated previously.
IMO, the guy deserves what he got just for being such a dumb-ass that he wouldn't think this would cause a stir.Maybe. But I think that's a very sad statement.

Supposed a black man had come into the party painted white, with a coon dog by his side and dressed like the stereotypical southern red necks. Do you think the white population would be screaming racist? Yet, by your definition, that's exactly what he is. Would he have been fired for doing this? Would apologies need to be made all around? The answer I think is "no". Because I don't feel that whites are as ultra sensitive about the race card, as blacks are. Everyone would have had a few laughs and gone on to enjoy the party.

And do you suppose there might be a reason for that?

Oh for pete's sake -- the reason ended 200 years ago. We have welcomed them into our "Americanism"; many of them want no part of it. Oh wait, they want the "good" parts, all the benefits and such. They are so busy making sure that they are viewed as separate from the general American populace, that it slips by them that this situation is of their own making. Slavery ended years ago -- it was wrong -- most Americans agreed on that. But many blacks STILL think all other races OWE THEM for something that was ended hundred of years ago. My feeling is if you don't want to be ostracized or looked at as different (which they clearly DO want), then just be an American, whatever color that happens to be.

'They'... ? Whilst it's impressive that you feel confident enough to speak for all black Americans, I think it's a bit rough on them.

I'd say that 'they' most likely just want to live their lives just like you do, without prejudice. When you say 'just be an American', what does that mean exactly? What are they doing if not 'being an American'? Don't these people hold passports or something?

To be fair the current state of affairs is more or less a direct result of the oppression the blacks suffered in the past. It takes more than just a formal change in laws to bring true equality. Therefore I must conclude that at the very least the costume was poorly considered.

Oh for pete's sake -- the reason ended 200 years ago.

Really? So segregation in the 1950's didn't exist? And you really believe that prejudice against blacks doesn't exist now? I honestly didn't think you were that naïve, Spelly

In what way is it to the entire race's detriment? Did he have a sign around his neck saying "Today's typical American black man"? No he didn't.

Racism doesn't have to be that blatant to still be racism.

The whole concept of a costume is to dress up as something you're not. He's not a black convict and thought it would be cool to masquerade as one.
Well, unless he's actually been to prison, he could have gone as a white convict. The fact that it was just a costume is entirely beside the point.

First off, if you note in my second line, I stated "many of them", not all of them. There is a distinct group that feels that whites, or any non-black actually, owes them a living, for the injustices of a few hundred years ago. I have many black friends that agree with me on that point. I've also spent many years in the Carolinas -- went to college in South Carolina and lived outside of Charlotte, North Carolina, which is predominantly black. I've spent many years around their culture -- and I say "culture", because they make a point of it being different from American culture.

My point in all of this was -- they make a point of wanting to be considered different. Many want to be considered "Black Americans" rather than "Americans" -- they want special treatment, special favors, special opportunities, etc. But after they've created this identity entity and set themselves apart from everyone else consciously -- then when they are noticed as such, or criticized as such, they scream the race card. It's a double standard that I have zero sympathy for.

Actually Splunge -- many blacks wanted their own schools. Segregation wasn't a cultural issue, it was a political one. A good friend of mine that I went to school with is from Huntsville, AL -- We've had this discussion many many times -- he told me of many conversations with his black friends and their parents back in Huntsville -- relaying the fact that most blacks DIDN"T WANT to go to school with the whites. They all saw it as political posturing.

Racism doesn't have to be that blatant to still be racism.Assuming racism where none exists is IMO racism of another kind.

Well, unless he's actually been to prison, he could have gone as a white convict. The fact that it was just a costume is entirely beside the point.Completely disagree. Maybe he likes the look of a black man with the dreads as a convict, and not so much the redneck with buck teeth.

Spelly, I wasn't talking so much about schools as just the general segregation and subjugation of blacks - drinking fountains, buses, the whole Rosa Parks thing, etc. Of course, it would have helped if I had made myself more clear in my post.

Edit:
Assuming racism where none exists is IMO racism of another kind.

But not recognising it unless you're hit over the head with it is just turning a blind eye.

But not recognising it unless you're hit over the head with it is just turning a blind eye.So you really think that the simple act of a white man dressing up as a black convict for a Halloween party has no other explanation than racism? Then I think I do see racism and not from the white guy.

ok -- and I understand your point. I just have no sympathy for them in these times. The whole "sins of the fathers", I don't buy. Times have changed -- I've seen poor people of all kinds -- in the back hills of the Carolinas -- tin roof shacks, no shoes, etc. Has nothing to do with color. I'm for everyone trying to do the best they can with what they have -- not having past behaviors from generations ago thrown up in my face on a continuing basis. I think it's gotten way out of hand -- they demand, not ask. They want payment for grievances from long ago and it'll never stop. In essence, it's the "you owe me" mentality. I think the time for debt collection has long since passed.

So you really think that the simple act of a white man dressing up as a black convict for a Halloween party has no other explanation than racism?
Sure. As I said in my first post, he could just be a dumb-ass who doesn't realize that he's being racist. But one doesn't have to know that they're a racist to be a racist.

Look, I'll admit that this is somewhat low on the racist scale. But there does exist a prejudice against blacks, and there does exist a stereotype of convicts being black, so for a white guy do dress up as a black convict - well, I just can't see how there isn't at least an underlying element of racism here.

Edit: Spelly, I think we're arguing two different things. You're basically saying they should "get over it", and I can't say I totally disagree. But that doesn't mean that racism still doesn't exist, and that's where I'm coming from here.

I guess we just don't see eye to eye on this one. I think there are plenty of non-racist possibilties here, and assuming racism in this case with the facts as we know them is racist itself.

You say he is playing a stereotype Black Convict, but what if he was playing a SPECIFIC convict? Maybe one that happened to be black, and have dreds... Im sure with the huge numbers of convics in america, past and present, there would have been some black, dreadlocked convict...

Barmy, I live in an environment that has a lot of black people in it and, while the older generations certainly just want to live a good American lifestyle, the vast majority of my generation seem to genuinely think they are owed something by every other race (yes, even asians and hispanics). There are some that genuinely follow their parents models and live as responsable citizens, they are generally labeled as 'white wannabes', 'race traitors', and 'white puppets' by their black peers. I have no problem with them trying to maintain their racial identities, I don't complain about half of them being named things like 'Chauntiqua' and 'Duvon', but when they complain that none of the keychains have their names, when they expect that they can make a living simply by being angry blacks, and when they think I should appologize for being white near them, I have a problem.

And with all this, believe it or not, I'm not racist. I don't care about their race. I have had some very good friends who where named 'Chiquita' and were very into African culture, but they didn't think everyone should apologize to them personally.

@BTA: I think where you fail to see eye to eye is that you are talking about intent and we are not. The guy may have never intended to play to the "all blacks are criminals stereotype", but the stereotype is still there. The reason that dressing as a black convict is not the same thing as a black man dressing as a white hick is because we don't actually have a pervasive "white people are hicks" stereotype. I've had several black friends who have been pulled over for "driving while black". Having lived for years in a "black neighborhood", I've seen first hand the dichotomy between the way I am treated by the police and the way my neighbors are treated. Discrimination of blacks is still a very real thing and, whether intentional or not, that costume played right to it. I agree that there are lots of (either non-plausible or non-complimentary) explanations for why this guy chose to wear that costume that don't involve racism, which is a big reason that I am not convinced that they should fire this idiot, but not intending to play to a pervasive and nasty stereotype is not the same thing is not doing it.

Barmy, I live in an environment that has a lot of black people in it and, while the older generations certainly just want to live a good American lifestyle, the vast majority of my generation seem to genuinely think they are owed something by every other race (yes, even asians and hispanics).Well, NOG, I disagree. In my view, this is just a subtler, more pervasive form of the same racism that has plagued our nation for years. Simply put, any time you make blanket statements about an entire group of people, you are doing something wrong.

@BTA: I think where you fail to see eye to eye is that you are talking about intent and we are not. The guy may have never intended to play to the "all blacks are criminals stereotype", but the stereotype is still there. The reason that dressing as a black convict is not the same thing as a black man dressing as a white hick is because we don't actually have a pervasive "white people are hicks" stereotype.
Drew said it much better than I have so far.

assuming racism in this case with the facts as we know them is racist itself.

Well, I suppose that might be true, except that I'm white, so it would be pretty hard for me to be racist against my own race. ;)

Drew -- I think he's going by experience, as what my comments were based in. We were not speaking for all blacks -- but there is a large contingent of black individuals who feel precisely that way and vocalize it every chance they get.

My point in all of this was -- they make a point of wanting to be considered different. Many want to be considered "Black Americans" rather than "Americans" -- they want special treatment, special favors, special opportunities, etc. But after they've created this identity entity and set themselves apart from everyone else consciously -- then when they are noticed as such, or criticized as such, they scream the race card. It's a double standard that I have zero sympathy for.

You seem to be under the impression that the formulation of an 'African American' identity preceded racism. I don't know how to respond to that.

I've seen poor people of all kinds -- in the back hills of the Carolinas -- tin roof shacks, no shoes, etc. Has nothing to do with color. .

The empirical data provides a rather different view than your anecdotal evidence does. The census tell us that 8.1% of whites were at or below the poverty line, compared with 24.9% of blacks.

I think where you fail to see eye to eye is that you are talking about intent and we are not.You're right, because in my mind intent is all that matters.

I'll even be more outrageous and say black people should be flattered that this guy wanted to go through so much trouble for his costume. It would have been much easier for him to just throw on a black and white striped shirt or an orange jumpsuit and said to everyone he met who asked him what he was supposed to be "Hey! I'm a convict". How lame. Instead he went the extra mile and changed his looks completely with the dreads and the "bronzer" and most thought "how original". How cool.

Well, I suppose that might be true, except that I'm white, so it would be pretty hard for me to be racist against my own race.Not really. I see it all the time. :)

I'll even be more outrageous and say black people should be flattered that this guy wanted to go through so much trouble for his costume.
So by your logic, a woman should be happy if a guy dresses up as a wife-beater. Or anyone should be happy if someone dresses up as a pedophile. Especially because of the creativity it would take to come up with a costume that says "wife beater" or "pedophile". I suppose you've dressed up as a rapist and wondered why people were offended.

Hey, I can be outrageous too!

The empirical data provides a rather different view than your anecdotal evidence does. The census tell us that 8.1% of whites were at or below the poverty line, compared with 24.9% of blacks.

Well we could get into a discussion about who gets included in a census and who doesn't -- but I think my point was clear enough -- you don't have to be black to be poor. But, given your posted statistics, do you have a rationale as to why nearly 1/3 of those blacks in the census are indeed classified as "poor"?

(I know we've deviated from the main thrust of this thread -- maybe it's worth another topic started?)

So by your logic, a woman should be happy if a guy dresses up as a wife-beater. Or anyone should be happy if someone dresses up as a pedophile. Especially because of the creativity it would take to come up with a costume that says "wife beater" or "pedophile". I suppose you've dressed up as a rapist and wondered why people were offended.No, no, no, wifebeater is too easy and lame. Just put on some jockey shorts and a wifebeater shirt with a big beer gut and pizza stains down the front and say "Why do you make me hurt you?"... done! Now crack-whore... there we're talkin'!

Now pedophile or rapist... not sure how you'd dress up as one and get it across, but if it got the message across without you having to tell everyone you came across what you were supposed to be, then yeah... cool!

Now pedophile or rapist... not sure how you'd dress up as one and get it across, but if it got the message across without you having to tell everyone you came across what you were supposed to be, then yeah... cool!
You obviously weren't at the last party I dressed up for. And it wasn't even a costume party!

OK, like you said, we don't see eye to eye here. Go figure - another Alley example of "agree to disagree". :)

Woo, Mountain Hare is back*, baby! *nobody cares*

Spellbound:

Supposed a black man had come into the party painted white, with a coon dog by his side and dressed like the stereotypical southern red necks. Do you think the white population would be screaming racist?


No! In fact, a number of whites who suffer from the 'white guilt complex' would be congratulating the negro for making such a clear and concise statement about the oppressive white establishment.

[*On probation. -Tal]

remember only whites can be racist. haven't you memorised your liberal handbook yet? as only whites have been in power, they are the only ones capable of oppressing others. therfore, no others can be racist!
i , unfortunately, actually know people who believe this!

amaster,spellbound specifically stated she was using the back hills of the carolinas as a basis for her observations & in the hills of carolina there are more poor whites & indians(sorry native americans) than blacks. however, just as she stated up in the hills, it doesn't matter if you are white, black, red, brown or yellow poor is poor.

i know its been brought up in other threads before however just talk to blacks of a certain type & you will see the "whitey owes me" attitude at full bore.

People used to use black makeup all the time, who cares, its not like the employee was out to offend black people. It was a halloween costume. If people can't see the difference, then their loss.

haven't you memorised your liberal handbook yet?

There isn't one. Because if there is, I would have written it...but I'm working on it....

just as she stated up in the hills, it doesn't matter if you are white, black, red, brown or yellow poor is poor.
.

This a deliberate deflection. Poor is poor, but a disproportionately large number of minorities* are poor. This is significant, and not because it indicates that every major minority group has a culture of laziness and is unwilling to integrate into American society.

*Every 'non-white' racial group identified in the census had a higher poverty rate than whites did.

But that's not really an excuse, is it? We all have our own share of problems, and unless we're wallowing in an endless supply of money, we mostly have a hard time dealing our problems as well.

If I have a medical condition that will require life-long treatment, would I expect to get constant help from a healthy black family next door on account of that? Would I get it even if I did? No, on both counts, obviously.

In my experience, it's very rare for someone to get all the breaks and someone else none whatsoever. Most of us have to work hard for whatever we want to achieve, as well as deal with a constant stream of problems in one shape or another. Expecting someone else to provide the good life and solve your problems for you doesn't happen any more for the average white Joe than the average black Joe.

There's a good deal of poor white people everywhere too, and they don't expect the rich black people to come rushing to their aid. Heck, not even the rich white people do.

And yes, we're going a little off-topic with this...

I think this is really an interesting side-conversation (maybe more interesting to me than the main thread. I'll open a new thread on the issue . . . here (http://www.sorcerers.net/forums/showthread.php?p=617056#post617056)

AMaster:

*Every 'non-white' racial group identified in the census had a higher poverty rate than whites did.


Does that include the Jews and the Chinese?

Jews aren't a racial group.

dmc:

Jews aren't a racial group.


Whether the Jews are a racial group is 'controversial', although all that stuff about Jew genes being conserved in the mtDNA sort of suggests that genetics plays an important role in determining 'Jewishness'

No, you really are missing the point. Being Jewish is primarily a religious issue, with a cultural subcontext, that is made more complex because Jews have been, throughout much of their history, very insular in whatever country the live. Jews can fall into several racial groups depending how expansive your definition is. If you look at the races that I learned in anthro 101, there are three: caucasoid, negroid and mongoloid. Under those three wide criteria, most Jews fit into the caucasoid category, as that includes middle easterners, europeans, etc. You'd have your converts and children of converts who could fit into one of the other two categories, as well as the Ethiopian Jews, but the majority would be caucasoid.

If you define race on some other criteria (which mostly appears to be dividing the caucasoid category into many subcategories), then the Jews spread out farther, but so do most other groups.

For example, I'm Jewish (meaning that my parents are Jewish, their parents are Jewish, etc. as far back as I know). I don't practice the religion but would still identify myself that way on a cultural basis. I'm also "white" and would not fall into any subcategory until you got to the level of something as silly as "white with ancestry primarily from Eastern Poland/Western Russia," which is just plain ridiculous.

The bit with the genetics just covers the fact that the Jews have been a very insular group for most of their history and tended not to merge much with the general population around them, which goes back significantly farther than the diaspora from Spain in the 15th century. When a group is that insular, the genetics can get very hairy, which is why there are a number of "Jewish" diseases based on genetics, like Tay Sachs and the like.

The basic problem, of course, is that "race" is a tricky word. And, because I am having such fun with the new boards and this post is wildly off topic, I'm opening a new thread to discuss exactly what "race" is, whether Jews or any other cultural/religious group qualify as a race, and such other concepts.

Here (http://www.sorcerers.net/forums/showthread.php?p=617335#post617335)


Any further posts in this current thread need to relate to the costume party.

In my opinion we are that afraid of any sign of racism because we still are racists. It goes like this:

1. Some minority is being treated really bad. It's estabilished in the society and understood as "all right" by the majority.
2. Now comes the realisation that we all are human so we should treat each other like that. So we cross out that bad behavior towards other race(s) from our code of laws.
3. Everybody avoids racism at any costs. This leads to non-equal treatment again, now in favor of the minority, which seems like a good idea. But it makes a perfect basis for further racial conflicts.

In my country there is similar racial problem with a minority of people who were used to nomadic life for centuries. Now they have doors open everywhere in order to integrate in our society. BUT 1.not everybody approves them as full-fledged part of the society and 2.they can abuse this "positive discrimination" and many of them do so. Now there are even more reasons for interracial hatred!

I don't know the situation in US that well, but I think it can't be completely different.