Talk:Reverse racism/Archive 10
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Reverse racism. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 5 | ← | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 |
No mention of interpersonal racism?
For some reason this article fails to mention interpersonal racism against white peoples.
Instead, it heavily relies on Institutional sort of racism, citing that white Americans are not disadvantaged and so on.
Someone who might stumble upon this article will likely walk away with an understanding that the only kind of white racism that can exist is an institutional one, and henceforth in the current society no kind of reverse racism (against white people) exists. Feels wrong to have only one perspective represented.
I suggest amending the first 3 paragraphs to also include references and give examples of interpersonal racism. CorrectingCorrector (talk) 00:47, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Interpersonal "racism" is mentioned in the first paragraph of § United States:
The concept of reverse racism has also been used in relation to various expressions of hostility, prejudice or discrimination toward white people by members of minority groups.
The fact is that reliable sources tend to focus on institutional aspects such as the effects of affirmative action. Feel free to present any mainstream, published scholarship that focuses on interpersonal "reverse racism". —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 05:43, 19 May 2024 (UTC)- Why not incorporate that “The concept of reverse racism has also been used in relation to various expressions of hostility, prejudice or discrimination toward white people by members of minority groups.” into one of the first three paragraphs?
- I like the way that the Racism Against Asians is structured. It mentions the racist policies as well as (implied to be) interpersonal discrimination/mistreatment. Failure to mention interpersonal racism against white people in one of the first 3 paragraphs seems wrong, those 3 are heavily making an impression that only institutional kind of racism against white people can exist.
- What exactly are you asking as far as a citation for interpersonal racism goes? You can be racist against any race on a personal level, not sure what kind of published literature would you want on that? CorrectingCorrector (talk) 17:32, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- I've never heard of the term "reverse racism" used in this context. Racism against whites on an interpersonal level is just "racism", not "reverse racism". Do you have reliable sources? O3000, Ret. (talk) 17:48, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) If you are asking for a change to article contents, you have to be able to support that change with a reference to a published, reliable source. Wikipedia does not publish the opinions or observations of its users. The sentence I quoted is not in the lead section because it is based on only one source out of many. Wikipedia articles must represent the views of reliable sources proportionately, without giving undue weight to any particular viewpoint or aspect of the topic. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 17:56, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Editorial Gatekeeping
| Not useful WP:TPG O3000, Ret. (talk) 00:08, 17 September 2024 (UTC) |
|---|
| The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
Over the past year, it has become increasingly obvious that editors User:Sangdeboeuf and User:Objective3000 are engaging in egregious POV pushing to gatekeep this article from necessary editing. These two editors consistently appear under every talk page post here, flaunting WP: NPOV, WP: NOR, and WP: GAMES as they refuse to intellectually engage with, or otherwise wilfully mischaracterize any critisms brought by other editors -- editors who have consistently and accurately illuminated the numerous, glaring flaws in this article's sourcing, coverage, and adherence to wikipedia standards (see current talk page and talk page edit history). Such talk page sections are then either retitled or deleted by these same editors, presumably in the hopes that others will not investigate and find the mountain of incisive criticism hidden in the article history links. Months ago, I pointed out the problematic nature of one of User:Objective3000's stated views in a talk page section here (now deleted, unsurprisingly). In response, I was rapidly and illegally blocked (see User talk:Tyrone Jahir#Moderator Fiasco), then quickly ganged up on by a group of moderators who could not justify my ban, deleted non-violative statements off my own personal talk page (while keeping my alleged violation up on the article talk page), and even blocked me further for behavior it was actually not possible for me to have engaged in. This experience was incredibly bizarre, but reflecting, makes perfect sense in light of the fact that this article is firmly ideologically captured, and has users such as User:Sangdeboeuf and User:Objective3000 (and probably others) working together to ensure it can't be changed. This article desperately needs a group of unbiased editors - totally unafilliated with User:Sangdeboeuf and User:Objective3000 - to go through and examine this article's talk page history. I am confident they will come to the conclusion I have. Tyrone Jahir (talk) 12:13, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
|
Anti-white racism
- Thread retitled from "Change to anti-white racism".
Apart from this being written and titled exclusively from an American or– more generally– a Western perspective; reverse racism infers that racism is a characteristic of white people; that it originates from white people; that it's mainly white people who are racist; thus the 'reverse' has connotations that the racism against White people is different from racism. I suggest changing the article name to match and similarly reflect the 'anti-black' article. 90.247.86.238 (talk) 15:04, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
- We don't have the power to change language. We only document. O3000, Ret. (talk) 15:33, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
- Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. And the NAACP both disapproved of the Black Power movement. In fact, he was quoted saying, the black power movement "connotates black supremacy and an anti-white feeling that does not or should not prevail." Also 2603:9008:1107:2755:E162:BD98:940B:CA9D (talk) 18:54, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- I fail to see how that relates to this article. If anything, reverse racism is an anti-black/asian/etc racist concept. O3000, Ret. (talk) 18:59, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. And the NAACP both disapproved of the Black Power movement. In fact, he was quoted saying, the black power movement "connotates black supremacy and an anti-white feeling that does not or should not prevail." Also 2603:9008:1107:2755:E162:BD98:940B:CA9D (talk) 18:54, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Actually, it implies that racism is a characteristic of white people, but other than this rather pedantic point I agree with you.
- A search for "Anti-white racism" redirects to the "reverse racism" article, the suggestion being that "racism" is a quality unique to white people, hence "reverse racism" is "white people getting what they deserve" from other ethnicities.
- Firstly, there's no such thing as "reverse" racism...there's just "racism", plain and simple.
- Secondly, "anti-white racism" is a very real phenomenon (if you trust "lived experience" as the basis of CRT, you can trust my lived experience on this point), and deserves an article of its own, not a redirect to an article attempting to justify "affirmative action". 86.14.43.73 (talk) 12:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is explicitly not based on the
lived experience
of its users, as explained in the very first sentence of Wikipedia:Verifiability. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 18:48, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is explicitly not based on the
Semi-protected edit request on 26 July 2024
 | This edit request to Reverse racism has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the past decade experts have found that implicit bias does exist in police officers. This manifested in a stronger hesitancy to use deadly force against historical recipients of systemic racism and no hesitancy to use deadly force against historical perpetuators of systemic racism. In the same study, the experts recognize the controversy of the study, and acknowledged that further studies must be done to more firmly conclude the presence of reverse-racism.[1] PlatypusInAHat (talk) 15:23, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Heart (talk) 15:26, 26 July 2024 (UTC)- 80 cops in Washington state does not make a solid conclusion EvergreenFir (talk) 16:39, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- The authors have published a correction to their 2016 study (my bolding):
Doing a quick search for academic secondary source coverage of James et al. turned up the following consensus study report (my bolding again):We would like to acknowledge our misuse of the term 'Reverse Racism' within this article's title and content. We did not account for the deeply controversial racial context surrounding the term within race/racism scholarship [...] In hindsight, our use of the term to describe officers fearing the consequences of being perceived as biased and modifying behavior accordingly would have been better titled 'The Counter Bias Effect.'
An appropriately weighted summary of this material might be included in Racial profiling in the United States if anywhere. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 21:13, 26 July 2024 (UTC)Results with police officers in similar experiments are somewhat mixed. [...] in the work by James and colleagues, there was reason to suspect that officers and lay people responded strategically, intentionally attempting to act without racial bias [...] This concern is compounded because, in these studies, participants had several seconds to respond. Given sufficient time, the desire to respond in an egalitarian fashion can override factors like racial animus or statistical prediction when individuals are aware that race may influence behavior.[2]
References
- ^ James, Lois; James, Stephen M.; Vila, Bryan J. (2016). "The Reverse Racism Effect: Are Cops More Hesitant to Shoot Black Than White Suspects?". Criminology & Public Policy. 15 (2): 457–479. doi:10.1111/1745-9133.12187. ISSN 1745-9133.
- ^ National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (2018). "Racial Bias and Disparities in Proactive Policing". Proactive Policing: Effects on Crime and Communities. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press. pp. 282–283. doi:10.17226/24928. ISBN 978-0-309-46713-1.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)