"carrying the false implication that black people break the law more often" While you may argue that black people(according to FBI statistics) being responsible for 38% of all violent crime(13% of the population) is because of circumstance, claiming it is false is, well, false. Perhaps it's a genuine frustration with these patently false claims that drives people to "troll" whoever publishes it. While it may make African-Americans mad when this stat is brought up(often in conjunction with black on black crime which is not specific to black culture as almost all crime is same race on same race), it is a cogent fact. Black people, make up a disproportionate number of violent criminals and also are disproportionally the victims of violent crime and the black community refuses to acknowledge it which makes white people confused and scared. All a white person ever hears is that black people need more money to stop from killing each other. Perhaps instead of bringing the facts of the issue to the discussion, it would be more beneficial if white people washed their hands of the issue and simply said, "Besides me giving you money, what can you do to stop your community from having murder rates that look a war zone?" The truth is white Americans have no idea what it means to have 70+ members of our community shot over a single weekend(by other black community members) like happens in Chicago so we have no real solutions to offer the black community.
11
Poor communities of color are policed more aggressively, though, as well. This inflates the statistics for things like drug use and, to a lesser degree, drug dealing.
7
Funny. You would think that since 1684(first slave ship) most black people would realize that the only place we can truly let our guard down would be a locked sub basement in an obscure part of town. This country has mostly abused and persecuted us from the very beginning with most non black people having a too bad attitude towards our history of suffering in this country. Don’t be foolish enough to complain as we will be relentlessly attacked for having the temerity to do so. Even in the alleged liberal bastions of this nation you will find apologists for incredibly racist founding fathers who set the tone for what we are still experiencing to this very day. For those of f you who would proclaim how much better things are for us, I find it a shame that you can’t wear black skin even for a week to get a small taste and f what we live through our entire lives.
13
No. 1619.
6
I only shared the year to indicate the horror of slavery was even earlier-only 12 years after the first permanent colony was established by the settlers.
3
@RealHistoryBites - Actually, 1619 was when the first indentured servants arrived in America, the first actual slave ship arrived in Virginia in 1684. (I'm just a history nerd not a troll.)
4
It’s a shame to say this when we’re almost at the year 2020, but it’s high time to stop segregation and discrimination (of any sort) based on skin color. Identity politics is regressive, not progressive.
239
@Anonymous Your sentiment towards eliminating segregation may be well intentioned and good, but this article does mention that the subreddit was open to all people, right until the toxic internet trolls showed up to ruin things. You will also note that the moderators are allowing non black members, after verifying they are not a toxic internet troll.
It sounds like the only people being excluded here are the bad actors.
131
@Anonymous Great idea. White people should go first, to demonstrate a good faith effort. (white man here).
36
Plus- racial division, was an explicit goal of Putin’s Russian trolls farms.
18
I am a verified black person on BPT. I sent my picture in on April 1st and have enjoyed every moment since. Country Club threads are so much more civil and vulnerable. This is not the only subreddit I belong to that has these sort of restrictions. On r/Atlanta, political threads are closed to people who do not have a “positive record” on the subreddit, which I believe is measured by karma metric but unsure what the actual number is. It means that racists who live in North Georgia can’t just ruin everything for everyone trolling. I had to earn karma before I could join some other subs. “What if someone made a whites only sub?” I guarantee no black person on earth would want to join, and it already exists. It’s called The_Donald.
488
@Margaret Sadovsky :
I'm white and would have nothing to do with "the Donald" if I didn't have to (by virtue of the electoral college---not popular vote---making him president).
6
even the most racist subreddits like the_donald don’t exclude anyone based on race.
you may not like what is said but censoring speech based on race is different from feeling offended.
country clubs that excluded people based on race were widely agreed to be racist and wrong, which is exactly what these “country club” subs are by following the same principle.
it’s still racist if you’re doing it to white people.
9
@Margaret Sadovsky false equivalency, what if a sub required people to demonstrate their white skin to join? That’s the real question
10
No clue why this is a big deal. If users don't like it, they can create another subreddit where this isn't a requirement. And if it has good content, it will thrive. That's the whole point of reddit. Most of the people upset about this are likely white people who can no longer troll this subreddit. I say, good for them. It's their subreddit and they can do whatever they want.
55
The photograph proves nothing. Anyone can upload a photo of anything on the internet.
5
As an old white liberal, I say why not? Enough with this progressive whining.No white person will ever understand the nuances of being black in USA. Twitter that
10
Not all racists have white skin.
10
This article was and is very thought-provoking to me. It's disparaging that other people with my skin color look down on others just because of his or her skin color. I feel.
3
If you have to evaluate someone’s skin color to determine whether their opinion is valid, then you are in the wrong.
13
Why would they want to self-discriminate themselves if they meant it?
2
This development is hardly surprising.
My antennae become extra alert whenever I come across a comment in the NYT that incorporates the self-identifier, "As a ____ person . . . ," or the disclaimer, "I am not a ____ person, but . . . ."
It is too easy for trolls to use pseudonyms to perpetuate propaganda, by masquerading as a member of a group or as an outlier.
The NYT should disallow this practice, and it will yield fewer incendiary, abusive comments.
I only adopt this practice when I introduce a potentially controversial insight. If one's actual identity had to be disclosed, fewer people would post deliberately provocative comments.
The admission requirements for "Country Club" are perfectly reasonable, although serious trolls can circumvent the forearm photo and signature requirement relatively easily.
Promoting received stereotypes by posturing is a huge problem on the Internet.
12
This is just as racist as having a site just for white people.
23
Not racist at all. The subreddit exists to talk about the race and the effects of racism by those affected.
19
I want to know what is the Secret test for Blackness that liberals want to employ.
Is it a visual test, a smell test, a feel test or a genetic test.
All this is nonsense and ruining America
11
I don't understand how anyone can think that banning people on the basis of skin color from participating in a community is in any way okay? And then making people prove they are a certain race in order to gain admittance? It's frightening.
22
"carrying the false implication that black people break the law more often"
As per official FBI statistics, Black folks (12.7% of the US population) are overrepresented in every crime category from public drunkenness (13.9%) to murder (45%). Is that due to their race? Presumably not, and I believecontrolling for obvious factors such as income, education, geographical location etc. would get rid of all or most the correlation. Regardless, the above statement about "breaking the law" is still false.
The real issue is here is that certain people, such as New York Times journalists, push a narrative according to which what defines a person is not their income, their education, their geographical location, the content of their character, or any other factor. Instead, it's purely and simply their skin color. The same narrative is why /r/blackpeopletwitter is now filtering people by skin color.
That narrative is profoundly racist.
21
“These people are white,” said Tony Hinderman, 23, a black actor in Chicago. “Black people love Beyoncé. There is nothing to not love about her.”
Looks like we are back to square one everybody.. We have to start all over again! Sigh....
9
I see a lot of trolls on Twitter and asking someone to post a photo seems like a logical option to get rid of the trolls on a African American forum until you consider the poster could just lift a photo of a person of color somewhere on the web and id themselves as this person.
There is no escaping the antisocial, sexist and racist trolls on the internet.
4
Which is why they have the person write their username and a time stamp to rule out stock photos or imagery from the web. It was stated in the article.
4
Let's encourage judging and excluding people based on the color of their skin! What could possibly go wrong???
14
The question is brought up, but is there an answer to whether or not folks who don't "look black" like Meghan Markle would be allowed in? Or folks who are 1% black? What about a 100% black person who has the political views of Ben Carson?
8
“These people are white,” said Tony Hinderman, 23, a black actor in Chicago. “Black people love Beyoncé. There is nothing to not love about her.”
Well, this is hilarious. So, if you're a black person, you can see nothing wrong with a self-described feminist using sweatshops in order to produce her merchandise? And if you do, what happens? Is a task force assigned to bleach your skin?
13
“Anyone who wished to participate would need to send the moderators a photograph of their forearm, proving they were not white.”
They explicitly state that it’s about exclusion of white people. It is not about creating a space for black people. This alone escalates the whole situation from being inapropriate to reprehensible. It’s sad to see how they have replicated the three apartheid era racial categories.
“‘People are complaining, but I have yet to figure out a better way to do it,’ a black moderator whose user name is Nasjere told a reporter as he chipped away at a backlog of thousands of forearm photographs one recent afternoon, using various methods to root out fakers.”
During aparthied, they used to identify if someone was Black with “the pen test”. They would stick a pen in your hair and tell you to shake your head. If the pen stayed in place, you were black. Why not just go all the way and being that back too?
8
Is this racist, or is this just a 'support' group?!
If people of any stripe want a group exclusive for them, why not? But then watch parallel societies begin to take root in America. (See Turkish culture in Germany, and Angela Merkel's comments about it).
Being from Detroit, the reality was 'Whites fear Blacks' and 'Blacks hate Whites'. These sort of sites breed more of that.
6
Ask yourself whether this would be accepted if white people were asking to verify white skin. If you believe these should be treated differently, you are part of the problem.
20
So tired of White folks getting uppity whenever African Americans want to have a private conversation.
And I say that as a White guy. Seriously, where's the harm in African Americans having a space to talk to each other about their lives without us butting in?
This is absurd.
36
...carrying the false implication that black people break the law more often... So all those FBI statistics or local police statistics on murders or armed robberies are completely off? That is a huge story the NYT should do an in-depth story on. How can law enforcement continue to falsify the data? Why do the media continue to support the false implication? Yahoo seems to report only on crimes committed by African Americans. I've Americans aplenty who seem to believe that street robberies in America's cities are almost exclusively done by African Americans, rather than say by Japanese or Chinese or whites.
1
Judging issues like this is quite easy: Take the identity in question and switch it with another. Do you still feel like it is an ok thing to do? No? Than it's not.
America needs to get over its asinine obsession with identity. That goes for you too white people.
1
You know who brought this on themselves? White people spouting off their racist comments in what's supposed to be a safe space for black people.
One could argue that racism spurs more racism. If that's the case, then here's the answer to all the outraged white redditors: stop trolling the page with racist and prejudice opinions. Respect people's culture and need to have an identity that's free of hate speech.
28
So, to be clear, it's OK to have a Reddit site just for white heterosexual people who can prove they are white and heterosexual.
How about a scholarship fund just for white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestants?
6
"There is one way that white people can get on the list as well: Those with a history of thoughtful participation in the subreddit can write to the moderators about what white privilege means to them."
Like the Chinese intelligentsia forced to wear dunce hats and put signs around their necks denouncing their privilege it order to expiate the sins of their class? I'm sure that the comments of such participants will indeed be thoughtful. Probably not thought provoking, however.
9
No matter how you spin it, this is black sponsored segregation. Does Reddit even allow this? For someone who grew up in the Civil Rights Era, this is not progress...no way.
Identity politics do not belong in a democracy.
18
Have we totally lost our minds? What would you say if your kid came home and said, we are going to start a debating club at school, but it will be open only to kids who are _____ (fill in the blank with a racial category)?
What is supposed to justify this is that trolls or bad actors were polluting the conversation: bad white people. How is this any different from excluding blacks from a lunch counter or hotel on the excuse that there was a bad experience with other people who were black?
10
I don’t have a problem with it, particularly since it’s clear that the primary reason for objections is a desire to troll it, and the secondary reason for objections is the same tired, false objection that it is identity politics and the only victims of identity politics are whites.
I belong to a Democratic Party blog. We’re there because sometimes you don’t want to debate with someone who doesn’t share the most basic of values, like a monarchist or a segregationist or a racist troll. Nothing wrong with a group of individuals with something in common banning people with nothing desirable to add.
If you want a discussion club that’s uniformly white, they exist. Call your local GOP or segregated church or move to that rural county everyone knows is white and have at it.
18
Which "white" people aren't allowed? Where I grew up in Connecticut, if you weren't Anglo-Saxon and Protestant you weren't being allowed to join the local country club and many other social and political organizations. No Jews, no Catholics, no Italians, etc.. It didn't matter if you were "white". People need to remember that many Americans, for them and their families, the color of our skin was no advantage or access to opportunity. They were denied jobs, housing, etc., because they looked Italian, or Jewish, or Spanish, or spoke French. They lived in ghettos where the only black people they'd ever see were in movies and they were portrayed as badly as themselves in the media of the day. They didn't see a difference between their own experience and those ancestors of Southern US slaves who migrated to the cities in the North. And, in fact, there were few differences. Italians, Jews and blacks were all "redlined". A vowel at the your last name meant you didnt get into that private school or college. The Trump's didnt rent to blacks, or, Jews, or Italians. For these "white" people, listening to "blacks" complain about racism falls largely on deaf ears. Not because they don't care, but because they don't see themselves as "white" and their own ethnic, religious and family histories aren't ones of priviledge.
11
Imagine if this happened in the "real world" (not just online) where you had to prove your race in order to gain admission.
I'm absolutely opposed to excluding or banning people based on race, nationality, religion, etc., no matter the forum and no matter online or offline.
11
There are many communities carved out for POC where white people don't need to claim as their stomping grounds. For example, Subtle Asian Traits on Facebook is meant for Asians. It's a place to commiserate and also find joy and irony over shared traits.
3
This would be funny if it weren't so sad.
4
I'm white and I'm old, and I'm 50% Portuguese. And now, I'm fair game. Give me your best shot. Let's go from there.
2
When racist actions are taken by our guys/group/political clique, there's always a good reason, they are ok, and the actions are called progressive. When it's done by the other guys, oh the horror.
5
I'm white. I completely understand the need for a private internet group for blacks because they face invisible force fields in real life. I didn't understand this when I was a younger white fella, but I do now. I have met many white people who have the craziest ideas about race: my best friend at 13 who was obsessed with the foods black people ate, the captain of the rowing team in college who described them as strange subhuman creatures, the farmer who casually told me that black people are genetically predisposed to kill, the coworker who complained about black tourists in her nice town on the weekends.
22
Well, if you want to talk to yourselves instead of all born Americans, that's one way to do it.
But if you're hoping to sway white and non-white Americans away from their ignorance, you are, best and I can see it, doing nothing more than mooning a huge majority of Americans who happen to be other than Black.
So, I don't see any benefit to African Americans concerned about racism with a strategy of that sort.
But I understand your anger and rage.
Reach out to all America, not just African Americans who already know the cost of being Black in this white society.
So Pride being whatever you want it to be, try engaging in a dialogue online. I'm white. Try me.
Just call me Mel, and you're halfway there.
To be clear, it is not the responsibility of African Americans to “persuade” you not to be racist. It is the responsibility of the racist to “fix” himself.
17
"Given that the vast majority of Reddit users are white,.."
How did the author come to that conclusion?
4
Just can't imagine any online group legally banishing Black or Asian people....racism is wrong, no matter who perpetuates it.
I can understand why they were upset at people pretending to be Black, who were not. But what is to stop someone from photographing a friend or relative's forearm to enter a "black forearm" photo? (Yes, I'm white, yes, I have Black relatives by marriage).
4
When I view this so called "injustice" within the context and lens of the actual racial history of our country. I can only add this "aww boo hoo".
5
Reddit should ban this group.
8
Calling this racist and bad would be a totally valid point were it not for the centuries of enslavement and discrimination leveled at black people by white people. People like to pretend that actions like this exist in a vacuum. They don't. The actions this policy was made in response to perfectly make the point that we aren't in a society where total equal treatment is possible.
14
What a shame. I enjoy Black twitter. I enjoy the window into someone else's experience. But I never forget that I am a guest and no one there needs to hear what I have to say. It is enough that I'm able to listen in on their conversation.
Nothing good lasts for long on the internet.
8
An unfortunate irony here is that the actual twitter material that the subreddit draws from has a much looser verification system. There are twitter accounts that completely masquerade as accounts by black people, complete with fake profile pictures and personal histories.
2
I learned to really dislike racial bigotry among white people with bigoted attitudes from listening to the rationale of bigots. It's not necessary to contradict clearly bigoted attitudes to show how misguided they are to others. The bigoted views convey that.
1
I have a gay male friend who is outraged that there are females-only gyms. Not because he personally wants to go to these gyms, but because he thinks it’s unconstitutional to deny access to anyone for any reason. Huff puff huff.
Which is fine in the extreme abstract, but Mr Empathy ignores the facts of the real world: these gyms exist because guys at gyms are almost universally pigs to women at gyms, and enabled to be pigs because women have not been protected by the law he so righteously thinks he’s upholding.
It’s especially galling because gays needed - deserved - safe spaces.
Re the topic at hand: I cannot see how I, a white male, am harmed by these discriminatory forums. And I can easily see the need for them.
Maybe people need to channel their outrage into other areas … like working at a soup kitchen, getting voters to the polls, or singing Christmas carols at nursing homes … where they might learn a little empathy.
18
"The way to stop discrimination based on race is to stop discriminating based on race."
Justice Roberts.
8
As a white guy, I can't imagine a situation where I'd desperately need to comment on a controversial thread in that subreddit. And I can only speculate that if it did mean that much to me, I wouldn't have trouble writing a convincing message to the mods and asking to be added to the club.
As the article says, BlackPeopleTwitter was created by a white guy. If you don't want to play by the subreddit's rules, go make your own, it's doable.
This seems like an excuse for people to get their internet outrage quota.
7
What these people are essentially saying is segregation is okay if initiated by black people, because it's a given that they'd be (rightly) shrieking about racism if a group said "Whites only".
And who decides whether someone is "black enough"? Obama's mum was white, so does he count as a real black American? What about Meghan Markle, whose dad is white, and she is of a rather fair complexion?
When I read such articles, whichever identity group it originates from, I despair for our country.
3
Herein lies the conundrum...you want me to understand my white privilege. If that's all I know, I am blind to its existence. .....a fish doesn't know what it's like to be wet cause they don't know of anything else. Knowledge, empathy and understanding can change the world.
3
I couldn’t join a Mom’s group on Facebook until I was cleared by another Mom I knew. And thank goodness, as all of the discussions we had could only be appreciated by other Moms. Sometimes you need support from people who understand exactly what you’re going through.
16
It's just a social media forum, a place for like-minded folks to communicate with each other. It's freedom of association and it's not trumped by notions of "diversity and inclusion" in every single aspect of our lives, thank God.
4
So men are allowed to have private clubs that exclude women (and black men, let's face it). But black people (GASP!) want to have an exclusionary club to keep whites out.
I'm not a fan of identity politics but this isn't politics. This is a identity social gathering, which white folk have been doing to the exclusion of others for time immemorial.
What's good for the goose, is good for the gander.
18
@Laurence Bachmann which "white" people? Jews, Catholics, Italians, Greeks? Where I grew up in Connecticut, if you weren't Anglo-Saxon and Protestant you weren't being allowed to join the local country club. It didn't matter if you were "white".
2
This is just an internet social group. It's not a service or anything, there's nothing it provides, it's just a place for people to post images and argue with each other. If they want to make sure only certain types of people can participate, that's their prerogative. The space was explicitly made for black people, so trying to filter contributors and commentators down to verified black people makes sense.
If you're white and have a problem with this, ask yourself what you're even doing participating in this community and why it's so important you have a voice there, in a spot that's meant mainly for black people.
There's plenty of communities open to a plurality of people, heck there's even a "White People Twitter" counterpart to that subreddit and I'm pretty sure it isn't restrictive based on race. And if you want it to be, well, you'll have to put up with the sort of people who gravitate toward explicitly "whites only" spaces.
12
What next, a separate water fountain?
4
In the spirit of the pigs from Animal Farm by George Orwell, we see that the far left is really little different than the far right.
The Constitution declares all persons entitled to equal protection of the law but we see the Supreme Court grant colleges the right to make "race conscious" discrimination....so long as the discrimination favors one particular race.
And now, champions of freedom of speech censor speech unless it comes from one particular race.
The spirit of the pigs from George Orwell's Animal Farm lives!
"All animals are equal. But some animals are more equal than others"
It imbues the far left just as it imbues the far right.
6
Let the forum be limited to Black People. Given the small proportion of the population which they represent, it's easy for others to dominate the conversation and to stifle the expression of people who identify as Black and attribute their less than equal circumstances to White people. That's how they feel and being able to express that without a lot of opposition from non-Blacks is what would make them feel comfortable.
As for those who see some attitudes like all police are spending all of their time on the job finding ways to oppress Black people or that White people are secretly meeting and plotting the continued second class status of non-whites to perpetuate white privilege as misguided. Let it be. The facts will eventually bring those views back into a more reasonable perspective. The more people express them out loud, the less justifiable assertions will sound that way to them.
2
I fail to see the problem with the exclusive safe space. I once had a friend complain that a group email invitation (via a listserv) to talk about being black in the field of sustainability ended with something like "Black people only, please," and I had to let her know that she cannot be offended. Talking about being discriminated against or excluded doesn't need a bunch of white people (I'm white) invalidating their feelings or saying things like "but I'm not racist/discriminating." If 2019 was a safe space to be black, this wouldn't be necessary. But it's not, and people will troll and try to discredit "feelings" all day long and perpetuate untruths and further the divide. Kudos to the Country Club!
7
A self-inflicted paper bag test?
How dark do you have to be? How do they know whose arm it really is? Photoshop, and tons of other photography editing software can easily change skin tones.
2
I am not black, but I have brown skin, darker than some of my black friends. We joke about it. If I were to submit a picture of my forearm, I would probably pass the test. This is a small illustration of how ridiculous this method of exclusion is.
Here's the problem, and it applies to any group who want's to restrict access to social media. By its intrinsic nature, social media is public, except in places like China where totalitarian regimes strictly control access. Anyone wishing to have a private conversation cannot do it, unless, as a Facebook example, they form a group which the system allows to be private. But a private group defeats the goal of widespread participation. So, you can't have it both ways.
Otherwise, for better or worse, anything on social media is fair game
3
@ted "The concept of having people photograph their skin to gain entry into an internet forum is racist." So what? Last I checked racism in itself was not illegal. I agree with you that the society should strive towards more noble goals than tribal or racial segregation.
But how, other than by repressive authoritarian means, would you prevent such voluntary self-segregation? This group, like any other legal group, has an absolute freedom of association and you have the freedom of speech to criticize or mock them.
Forced desegregation is not that much better than forced segregation - both are illiberal.
5
Membership by racial biometry is inherently creepy. But many socially-acceptable organizations are built around ethnic and religious identity.
As an example: the Hillel Houses on college campuses. The vast majority of members are Jewish, although those who are not can join, too. However, anyone expressing Anti-Semitic views is soon socially ostracized, effectively ex-communicated usually without formal ejection.
In contrast, the online world is brittle, without that nuanced social pressure that governs real world relationships. In the case of trolls, provocation actually rewards the troll with sought-for attention.
So here's a suggestion for the organizers of the Black Reddit:
1) Start from scratch, using a small group of founding moderators who've met in the real-world
2) Set this rule: new members can join the group only when sponsored by three other existing members who have met the nominated candidate.
3) Finally, reward and punish the member's sponsors for the new member's behavior in the community, as well as the member.
This is a clubby process. One that will inevitably dampen diversity, but do so without explicit biometric checks. To anyone who objects to this as leading to homogeneity: isn't that the point of what the creators of
black People Twitter wanted? Isn't this how the real world works for everyone, anyway?
1
probably not legal or socially virtuous to police a conversation forum but on the other hand, everyone can join an exclusive country club, right? Right?
4
For me, it comes down to the idea that if you want to erase racial discrimination, then it's probably a good idea not to racially discriminate yourself -- no matter how well you can justify your perceived 'right' to discriminate.
2
They removed the post about Affirmative Action because it told an uncomfortable truth? Affirmative Action IS a significant factor in college admissions. We can’t live in a society in which Affirmative Action is upheld as legal but then be forbidden to talk about it.
3
I believe that at least one person and probably the author engages in racial stereotypes in this article, but, let's face it, the creators of this post have a point. They need a safe space to express their opinions. As online is now a vital place for many people, this is not an unreasonable attempt to create one. Perhaps it could have been done better. Perhaps it should have considered legal consequences more. But, again, there's a difference between being part of an oppressed minority and part of a majority that justifies different treatment if done carefully and respectfully
1
The "false implication that black people break the law more often"? That may depend on the city, income levels, education levels and many other variables. In New Orleans, whenever there's a shooting and an arrest, 99% of the time the victim and the perpetrator, as photographed, are black. Pretending this isn't happening is simply a form of censorship. I realize the motivation for doing this is that it's deemed harmful to black people, but how are we ever going to reverse the trends of black-on-black violence if we don't first acknowledge them, study them, and try various solutions to improve them? For example, would Andrew Yang's universal basic income have an impact on crime and violence in poor areas? What about jobs programs coupled with a dramatic increase in the earned income credit? What about universal preschool starting at 6 months of age? We need to understand the demographics of occurrence and test various solutions that address the associated risks, not simply ask people not to notice because it's "racist" to do so.
2
@Karen H
All crimes are not reported as such so we really don't know whether black people break the law more often (more often than whom?). We have learned from the histories of white mass shooters that they committed multiple crimes before the "big one" that were pleaded down to lesser offenses, expunged completely or not dealt with by the police at all. For example, the Odessa, Texas shooter's female neighbor called the police to report he came onto her property with a gun and threatened her. The police didn't bother to come out because they claimed they couldn't find his house. The Dayton, Ohio shooter scrawled on the high school bathroom wall a hit list of students he wanted to kill or rape yet no charges were filed against him. I suspect these are not isolated incidents. When whites are arrested for crimes instead of the police looking the other way and we have all of the necessary data at hand, then an informed conclusion can be made about which group breaks the law more often.
4
Not only is this forearm "test" wrong, it's ridiculous. My husband, who is Balinese, and quite dark skinned, would pass, despite the fact that he has nothing (other than skin color) in common with Black Americans, and having not come to the US until he was 27, has little historical understanding of the issue of racism in this country. I am a White American woman with a lifelong exposure to the issue of racism in this country - even studying it in college, reading a lot about it and participating in activism - but I'd be barred from this forum.
Remember MLK's "I Have a Dream" speech? People should be judged on the content of their character, not the color of their skin.
2
Express liberal views on a right wing forum or conservative ones on a liberal forum will bring more discord than discourse. If people want to speak in racial terms about society, that is their right. But people who think in terms of race include the people who oppressed others due to their views about racial superiority and inferiority.
1
I don't do social media so I really don't have a strong sense of what's right and wrong here. I get that there is a serious problem with trolls and to my way of thinking, that's one of the problems inherent in open access social media.
But I am a little nonplussed that the prominent defenders of the Country Club threads in these comments don't acknowledge the problems of having access restricted by race and also that it's race defined by how black your skin is.
One said it's a matter of freedom of association. But we made an exception from freedom of association exactly because we didn't think blacks and women should be excluded from public spaces even when they were privately owned. It was the segregationists like Governor Lester Maddox who said, in effect, "it's my restaurant and it's a place for whites only."
How do we feel about threads that might be open only to white people? Only to men? How about the next time someone says, "how did X get to be the leading choice for school board president, the answer you get back is: "those of us on the male only [substitute any group you like] thread thought X would be a great candidate." Does social media have restricted groups this way? I have no idea.
Then there's the notion that's someone is going decide whether you get into the exclusive thread based on how black you look. Am I getting that right? I am curious why this stuff is ok.
1
I don't understand why social media groups can't be selective in their members. To join Nextdoor, I had to prove I lived in my neighborhood. Sororities don't admit men and Frats don't admit women [as far as I know]. It's especially important for those groups historically subjugated, including women.
24
Are there closed Reddit options akin to a closed Facebook group? Why not do that and accept as members only those the moderators deem fit the criterion of those they are seeking to serve?
6
@Ken Nyt "To those believe there’s no problem here I ask you to simply reverse the situation. How would you feel if people had to prove they were white to be admitted?"
I would be okay with the reversed situation too. The point of freedom of association is that the criteria can be as arbitrary as the participants want them to be (as long as no laws are violated). So I see nothing wrong with self-segregation based on any characteristic, including race (any race). It's not my cup of tea but if some people want to do it, that's their free choice.
13
@natan - The reason people would be offended by the reverse situation is because there is a history there.
2
Amen. It’s also a false equivalency. The very reason there’s a need for a blacks only space is that people did/do have to prove that they’re white to do stuff.
3
This is a step in the wrong direction. Racism is not a one-way street, it is a traffic circle and the sooner we realize that, the sooner we can focus on the important aspects of civilization (hint: skin color is not one of them).
23
As a free speech absolutist I see nothing wrong with this forum.
I think there is a lot of confusion about what content restrictions or terms of service should be permitted by social media in general. I think all and any terms of service (ToS) should be allowed as long as they don't break actual laws of the land.
The key is that those ToS be publicly known and transparently and indiscriminately applied to all users who follow them. Unfortunately that's not always the case (Twitter and FB are regularly applying shadow ToS, rather than the official ones).
This particular subreddit is clearly and publicly stating the terms of participation so it's well within the spirit of free association and free speech. (In fact, being obliged to allow trolls to participate would be a form of forced speech.)
18
@natan You know there's a law that makes discrimination based on race illegal right?
I look forward to a follow-up on the tenor of the comments on the subreddit now that skin tone of the commentators is the measure on the content posted by future characters. A related aside: In 1927 (give or take) anthropologist Melville Herskowitz and his assistants used a toy, the Milton-Bradley color top to study the role of skin color on choice of marital partners in the African American community. Spinning the top beside an area of the upper arm of study participants, they would then rate color.
2
We white man resent being excluded. We're the ones who get to do the excluding.
22
Some people just can’t accept that they can’t be the bride at every wedding and the corpse at every funeral. Ok you can’t join one reddit group? Who cares. I wish people who are this outraged would be as outraged about child porn on Reddit and other sites as well as the dark web.
37
Yes, I second this point. If not being able to join just one particular reddit group is what generates outrage like this, I would encourage a thorough re-evaluation of what issues are a public priority right now.
11
I stopped reading at 'online forums caused an uproar'.
9
Can't wait for the uproar over a whites only subreddit from the same people who support this. The fact that they allow non-black users to also post but not white people unless they bend the knee to the idea of "white privilege" is just hilariously ironic.
27
@Andy - It's because there is a long history of "white only" - you can't compare the two.
6
Well if people truly want Voluntary segregation go right ahead.
9
This is a non-story. Think the NYT should be scolded for publishing this story. People are tired of these faux social justice warriors. Don't let Twitter trolls dictate the news.
18
To those believe there’s no problem here I ask you to simply reverse the situation. How would you feel if people had to prove they were white to be admitted? If you’re outraged you’re a racist. Period.
Until we stop treating any group as special we can have no social equality. It’s almost 2020. Time to judge people by what they do, not how they look.
19
@Ken Nyt
If white people were the oppressed, and black people were the oppressors, I would be good with it
4
Segregation always did appeal to the illiberal among us.
And today’s illiberals are ‘progressives.’
21
And some people wonder why I enjoy camping quietly underneath the stars, with the breeze as my sole companion.
Enjoy your Country Club, folks. My arm's white, and I don't feel like writing an essay today. Remember to not feed the trolls.
But the Draconis meteor shower is right around the corner, if you're ready to unplug from it all.
8
Identifying by skin color as a symptom of our modern aura blindness. Photographs don't show the whole person.
7
Fans of this so-called forum are rationalizing the same racism that they pretend to be against. This is a prime example of the double standards and hypocrisy of the "woke" (now a tired cliched term) social justice warriors. They apparently have very little self-awareness. It's the kind of duplicity in our current society that independents and moderates complain about. Why should anyone listen to them whine about prejudice when they practice it themselves? Where's the ethical authority in that?
30
False equivalency.
All you need to do is measure the harm Wokeness causes (somewhat annoying self righteousness) and weigh it against the harm caused by white supremacy (actual, you know, deaths).
It’s not even a close call.
8
@Scott - Not exactly Scott. This is a group wanting a safe space to talk about matters important to the black community without being attacked by racist trolls or having to justify or explain their feelings to outsiders. You really can't compare this to the long history of white only institutions in America!
7
The idea that "all black people think a certain way" (exemplified by the idea that "all black like Beyonce") is racist.
The concept of having people photograph their skin to gain entry into an internet forum is racist.
These are racist ideas that have been deemed "not-racist" by a certain fraction of the political spectrum. I hope that fraction loses. If allowed to flourish, this stuff will have a corrosive effect.
We laugh at "color-blindness" but the truth is that our goal should be a society where race and skin color don't matter. Will we get there? No, but we will equally never live in a society where no is ever murdered, yet that remains our goal. The goal matters. We need the right goal to move in the right direction and these people have gotten lost.
37
I'm a 60-yr-old white guy. My first reaction to the 'non-whites only' idea was admittedly, a little taken aback and 'Hey c'mon, we're not all bad'. BUT, I came to my senses and thought "Good for them. Everybody wants that kind of private personal group of their own kind of 'folks' to just relax with and let their guard down."
My wife goes to a Thursday afternoon group of her Mexican lady friends to eat and drink and joke and talk. If I insisted that I should also be welcome every week would they be racist or sexist to laugh and tell me to find my own friends?
How about a monthly poker game at some guy's house that is only for "the boys"? Is that so wrong? Of course not.
The lines are gray, not black and white. No pun intended.
28
So... Reddit... the company/community that inspired at least 2 white supremacist mass shooting manifestos, is upset at a forum for black people?
You don’t say...
20
Trolls have once again ruined something good on the internet.
119
@Al
AS the song goes,
Hit me with your best shot, America. I'd like to speak my mind.
@Al Yeah Reddit was better before all of the identity politics.
1
I don't see the problem with this. This is freedom of association.
Why shouldn't people have a space to speak with people who share their culture and experience?
African Americans have a right to police the boundaries of their community, especially considering all the violence that has been, and continues to be done to it.
381
Hmm.. I would see a problem with this as a form of excluding ppl for how they look and not for how they process the treatment of other human beings and experience.
Technically the process is flawed cause anyone with basic knowledge of how to use photoshop can alter the color of skin tone.
Ideally they would want to pose three random questions that reveal the users mindset which then can be told weather or not they are empathetic to the conversation being shared.
14
The obvious question is whether all groups have the same freedom of association.
87
@A F I agree with the principle, but the problem is practical not normative. Since race is not a real thing, even if it is a fake construct with very real implications, there is no objective factors that can be used to demonstrate it. Many "Blacks" have skins that are less dark than many "Whites". North-Africans are considered white by the census, but many Tunisians or Algerians have skins darker than many African-Americans. Greeks or southern Italians are coded as white, but a well-tanned Greek or Sicilian can easily have a darker skin color than Cory Booker. And so on and so forth.
31
White guy here. I don't necessarily see this as racist. Every affinity group wants to have a safe space in which to share ideas freely. The questions arise as to the content of the ideas, the motivation of the group, etc. That said, Reddit is not exactly a hotbed of democratic and civil ineraction. Still, I'm having a hard time buying into the outrage. Sorry, not sorry (as the current saying goes).
24
@CP
"Online" and "safe space" aren't really two terms that should go together.
4
@me You don't think white people have their own groups on reddit? I'd like to point you towards /r/The_Donald.
6
@me wrote: "white affinity groups should also have a right to their own restricted group." Absolutely, as long as none of these folks are fomenting hatred, violence, insurrection, etc. I think people need to share experiences with those both like themselves and unlike themselves.
Chris wrote: "'Online' and 'safe space' aren't really two terms that should go together." Not in the current state of "social" media, true, but secret discussion groups do exist giving at least some privacy and safety.
I'm not black. My niece is. She doesn't like Beyonce.
Stereotypes about what black people do and don't think seem like the same type of assumed groupthink and stereotyping that racists do.
But, I totally understand that there are troublemakers and people who play black to be able to say provocative things or hoping it will make their opinion more credible, and I very much understand the need to occasionally NOT be in mixed company, talk to people who totally get it and live it. I'm part of 3 other minority groups where that is such a huge relief to be able to do, and where we too have people who pretend a different identity to try to provoke.
Not sure that Reddit is a good place to try to have such a thing.
19
People just can't let anything be, can they?
4
No doubt there are white racists trolling this Reddit community but who else is? Techspot had an article earlier this year:
"Russian trolls are still wreaking havoc on many Reddit communities
It's very easy for a troll to post a strongly biased comment in response to a post and ignite a furious comment war. This is a quick and simple way to sow discord in a community against another community. With increased activity on a post, it would rank higher and would become more likely to be seen and shared by other users."
I was a moderator (and then manager) of a closed online discussion group (2,000 members) that dealt with stem cell research and regenerative medicine. Doctors, scientists and investors. And trolls. Members posted with anonymous pen names though a handful of us had access to the unverified identities of our members). It turns out that a small percentage of people have this troll gene. The site shut down after four years. I don't miss it at all.
I suggest that this vibrant black-only group have a small membership fee and have some of their tech savvy members set up their own site. Make it private. Worth a try...
5
I understand the appeal of this, but you cannot escape the racist trolls. Unfortunately they have taken over social media.
11
I see this in progressive FB groups all the time. The obvious trolls are obnoxious, of course. But it's the generally well-meaning, self-identified "woke" individuals who are most frustrating. There are always a few (or many) who just can't stop themselves from taking conversations about race and recentering the focus on themselves and their white experiences.
124
@E What a bummer that you can't have a little more patience for well-meaning allies who are imperfect human beings. What you're describing probably comes more often from run-of-the-mill self-centeredness than anything worth wasting your energy on.
We all have flaws and we all will *always* have flaws. Some of us realize this, and want to keep growing, and others don't. Obviously, it's not the responsibility of the disempowered to educate the privileged, and I'd imagine it would be absolutely exhausting to constantly encounter well-meaning people who have zero insight into the privilege they enjoy. But is it better to be frustrated and respond by alienating friends by mocking them with words like "woke," or to save your energy for the battle against those who really are the enemies of the oppressed and have no problem with that?
3
Places on reddit like r/WhitePeopleTwitter, BlackPeopleTwitter, LatinoPeopleTwitter, etc. are on the surface light-hearted self-depricating humorous screenshots of popular twitter posts that fit some kind of racial stereotype.
A lot of the time though, the popular posts in these communities generally have nothing to do with identifying as a white/black/latino, aside from the skin color of the person on twitter that posted it, which makes these places feel less like a harmless place for PG racially stereotypical jokes, and more like a place for racial groups to filter social media and discussion to just their group, their tribe.
Reddit is a strange place at times, and race segregated twitter communities are one of it's most unusual quirks.
1
I feel ambivalent about their choice to limit the group membership to blacks only (1. Assuming it's fine w/ Reddit policy. 2. As long as supporters of doing it this way would also be ok with other types of white/hispanic/asian/gender/etc only groups. Then it's their choice?) However, the moderators seems to be equating color of skin with being bad actors. So if someone doesn't like Beyonce and have different points of view then they absolutely can't be black? If it's all anonymous how do they know it's ONLY white people that has opinions they don't approve of? Let's go with the it's white people that are responsible assumption for a moment. Just because some people from a certain ethnic group engage in trolling doesn't mean all people from that group all do that. Isn't that what we're trying not to do? Make assumptions about a whole people based on a few? Everyone likes to feel validated and it may feel nice to be in a space where everyone agrees with you 100%. But recognize that leads down the same path as, say, a rednecks unite meeting where they agree w/ each other about all their views. So I guess it's really about what this group wants their platform to be, a place where you can go to feel comforted and feel right, or a place for mutual understanding and growth.
12
@Eve Delaunay - With all due respect I think you're missing the point Eve. It's not people dislike Beyonce, it was the nasty racist things that trolls would say about her.
Also, (again with all due respect) your comments make clear why some black people want a "safe space" to dicuss such matters without feeling attacked.
6
@Eve Delaunay
The problem is they have more than just contrary opinions, they have people trolling. And note that they do allow white people in (with more stringent requirements).
Look, I don't think this is ideal. But the purpose of the board is being subverted by bad actors, and the subversion is based on race. There was no "mutual understanding" going on *before* this policy was implemented. The moderators are doing what they can to save the board from permanently devolving into a morass.
The NYT used to have bulletin boards; some were even unmoderated, (I used to be quite active in the arts boards.) Eventually they became so out of control (and cost-prohibitive to monitor, I'd imagine) that the NYT shut them down and moved to the current system.
1
I'm White & WASP-y (English/Scottish/German/Australian).
I think it's terrific these guys/gals have created a space exclusively for AA reddit members.
Great idea, what's the prob?
(Not as if non-AA folks don't have a million and one other online boards & fora on which to fritter/twitter away their time.)
20
As a white redditor (who never heard of this subreddit before this article), I think the attempt to limit participation is fine. There are a million places on reddit where you can talk/troll to your heart's content. Leave these folks alone to have the conversations they want, with the participants they choose.
You want open, cross-racial discussion? Try somewhere like r/neutralpolitics. You want to troll an' hate, I'm sure there are plenty of subreddits for that already.
37
Oh no, a place white people can't be. Sound the alarms.
39
Just a daily reminder that the internet and social media are not real life--we don't exist there--and we need to work to engage each other in actual physical space to create a society worth having.
91
@Jason Perhaps for you. I live a lot of my life online and enact much of my society there. And it gets pretty real. :)
5
@Jason Here's another daily reminder as a rejoinder:
Some populations of people go through a lot more discrimination than others while "engaging each other in actual physical space," and having a digital safe space to unwind and vent at the end of the day actually helps to promote real-life social engagement across populations.
It's really just a more convenient version of what discrminated groups have always done physically, which is to gather together in safe groups and trade experiences.
7
gaslighting no. Racial id tests no. real simple. Getting back perspectives is important and smart. So be smart about how to do it. That's my perspective, and I'm black, although you'll have to take my word for it.
28
Years ago, before Reddit when mail lists were the thing, I was on a privately moderated all-women mail list where each new member had to be personally vouched for by an existing member. As in, we had to have met in person. The rule was, you had to be female. I don't think trans came up but my feeling is they would have addressed it without making a big deal out of it.
Can't really do this sort of curating over a large-scale forum like Reddit where anonymity is built-in.
It does seem like this particular forum is being trolled. As list mods, I'd seriously consider taking the whole thing off Reddit and running my own server.
14
Exclusion to avoid hate is not the same as exclusion to promote hate. To act as if they’re the same lacks nuance. It’s clear that people enjoy expressing their bigotry online because they can do so anonymously without leaving their deliberately segregated home/work/etc. environments.
161
There's absolutely nothing wrong with verifying a vital piece of your identity in a community of people who want to be sure about the people with whom they're engaging. To argue otherwise has no basis whatsoever. Disclosure: I'm white.
55
@Kevin "verifying a vital piece of your identity" - really? "to be sure about the people with whom they're engaging" - your view, and that of this piece, is truly depressing. We're going backwards in race relations in this country, very quickly.
8
@Kevin
So you are totally fine with white nationalists.
They do share a "vital piece of your identity in a community of people who want to be sure about the people with whom they're engaging."
PS - I am not.
3
It is a shame such a positive forum as this needs to resort to verification, but this is the world we currently live in.
I am not black, but as a Jew I can empathize on some level being part of a minority group. it can be difficult at times to enjoy authentic cultural experiences that are not.. ‘overwhelmed’ by the majority (White) Christian population.
I love my neighbors and fellow citizens, but sometimes it is healthy to carve away a little space to enjoy the company of those similar to you, or whom share the same interests.
I am not surprised at the ‘concern trolling’ mentioned in the article and present in these comments; that members of this subreddit are excluding people based on race, and proclaiming that this is somehow equivalent to actual active racial exclusion.
To the members I say ignore the trolls. You have a right to enjoy the company of whomever you want. We can only hope that your positivity overflows out of reddit and reaches those who need it most.
42
I see these groups as similar to groups that are exclusive to women. Many women, especially those who have been abused by men, feel the need to express themselves in a space that's supportive and non-sexist. I'm not sure that online is the best way to do this, but over the years I have been a member of a few groups of women who meet in person and have found them to be positive. Even in the comments of the NYT, many times men have expressed harsh opinions about women, and that helps no one and doesn't further discussion. Trolls exist and ruin online conversation. I don't blame Black people for wanting a space free of Whites. With the amount of prejudice and racism in the country at present, for many it's simply a matter of safety.
50
What is that, the paper bag test is reverse?
12
No problems here. Freedom of association. Just as women should be able to have women-only groups, etc.
24
Many commenters here would agree that if someone invited to their "home" for a cookout (BBQ for the uninitiated) and treated the event with disregard,and disrespect, the "guest" would not be welcomed back.
In this long conversation about use of space in America, history continues to be willfully ignored: that AAs have been excluded, chased out, threatened, etc for attempting to assimilate into the culture. And now some whites are complaining that because we have created ways to STAY OUT of their spaces, they still want to impose upon ours with rancor in their language and behaviors. Talk about hubris.
IMO it's very much an example of the narcissistic mentality which runs thru American culture. Or lack of means to occupy one's time in a constructive way.
Either way, at the end of the day those who complain about not being able to access AA spaces for their own purposes should not look at as a form of segregation but rather one's behavior is so distasteful that the invite to the cookout has been revoked.
51
@me. That's been par for the course since our initial arrival at Jamestown VA.
2
About those "well intentioned" white redditors who persistently question the so called root of social problems like institutional racism or who routinely use the "I don't see color" line and persistent questioning. This is a form of actual Trolling, and it's called "Sea-Lioning".
Sea-lioning definition: "A type of trolling or harassment which consists of pursuing people with persistent requests for evidence or repeated questions, while maintaining a pretense of civility. It may take the form of "incessant, bad-faith invitations to engage in debate".
29
@NG-I have never heard of "Sea-Lioning", but for ones that use the term it basically just sounds like they do not want to be challenged or questioned in their beliefs. That is fine, but those belief systems (without questioning or being rigorously challenged) generally fall under the category of a religion.
6
@Alex You seem to have missed the words "incessant" and "bad-faith" in the definition.
5
@Alex No, that's not why people object to sea-lioning, they object to it because it's done in bad faith in order to wear people down--ie, trolling. If I were a Black man in America, for example, I wouldn't take kindly to a sea-lion "civilly" demanding that I demonstrate and recount the racism I encountered--only to have that same troll come back with "Don't you think they really meant..." and "I like to give people the benefit of the doubt" or "what do you think about CHICAGO?"
14
If it’s exclusive , why not an exclusive site ?
8
While the idea of having a conversation about "Blackness" in America by folks of color is commendable and even necessary at a time when this country is so racially and politically polarized, most of those troll comments are the reason why I avoid social media platforms like Reddit and Facebook altogether.
5
This is not so hard to understand.
Black people want to have a family conversation, and some other people keep getting in their space and disrupting this .
Lack of civility required action to be taken. No manners=you are disinvited.
Don't blame the people setting up screens for participation. The problem is the others who keep making it all about them. And no, you aren't being persecuted if you are not being centered.
64
@Saddha
Reddit is a corporate-owned public forum, not a family conversation.
8
@Saddha "Lack of civility required action to be taken."
Rules for thee and not for me huh.
1
I thought Reddit was an alt-right site and was surprised (well, I still am) that black people are even there. I participate in a few online forums (none on Reddit!) and social media pages that are dedicated to discussing issues of concern to black people. There are no tests of admittance but troll comments are deleted or blocked where possible. Most participants ignore trolls or white people (some with "black" avis) pretending to be black. It is clear after a few comments who is black and who is not. The use of outdated slang such as jive turkey (really), or more subtle disconnects are the giveaways. I say drop the forearm test because there are too many ways to achieve false positives and rely on your knowledge of who we are to suss out the fakes.
1
@Lynn in DC
Reddit has a sub-reddit for everything from cats to engineering. Lots of good stuff there too.
7
@Lynn in DC Reddit isn't an alt-right site. It's an everything site, which unfortunately, yes, includes alt-right and every other loony one can imagine (and probably quite a few most of us can't).
The cess pools tend to get the media attention, but there are plenty of innocuous groups. I follow groups for women's interests, quilting, cooking, gaming, nature photography, my profession, and my home town, among others. Most of them are remarkably wholesome, and the mods take care of the occasional troll.
8
@mosselyn In my experience the best subreddits are are for local/regional communities and for niche interests, and hobbies (like you mentioned). The broader and more popular subreddits, such as the "default" subreddits when defaults were still a thing, can be much more toxic. I chalk it up to more users but also, less shared commonalities.
3
Fellow white people- Would it be appropriate for you to go to a PTA meeting in the next state over, give your opinion on how to run the place while talking over the parents of the students who actually go to that school? If someone did that at your kid's school's PTA meeting, wouldn't you be annoyed? Wouldn't you then ask for the PTA to limit meeting participants to parents of students who go there (in addition to any invited experts)?
110
@Elizabeth B.
Not sure about PTA meetings - but let's make it really simple.
Do you envision any meeting where people are excluded based on the color of their skin - and more particularly any meeting of white folks that excluded all black folks that would not be considered racist?
And if so - please provide an example.
4
@SteveRR I apologize you did not find my analogy simple enough to understand. Here is one that hopefully is more helpful:
A group of people who gather frequently to discuss how much they enjoy Star Trek decide to ban people who come to their meetings simply to make fun of the Star Trek from joining future meetings.
Does it make sense that any group of people with similar interests (from Stark Trek fans, to PTA's, to Black People) need space to discuss issues specific to their own interests without interference from parties intent on detracting from those interests? At the end of the day, this is an issue of finding an expedient (a synonym for expedient is easy) way of banning racist bullies from forums meant for Black People.
I hope this has helped you understand the issue at hand. If not, I would encourage you to ask one of your teachers for help! Take care!
7
Just get off the internet and go interact with people in person.
Ugh, we've reached peak ridiculous.
51
Here's a good solution to the problem: stop using Reddit. It's a garbage dump of the worst of the internet.
18
All the faux-concerned, gaslighting comments here are exactly echoing the deliberate pot-stirring posts that this community would prefer not to deal with in every single conversation on a daily basis. And who can blame them? As a white person, I can understand when a group I'm not part of would like to converse in a space without either deliberate trolls, or clueless purveyors of whattaboutism, continually derailing.
There are a million places on social media where you can be as divisive as you want; why the uproar about being asked not to enter ONE?
332
@James
I am an old white man James and grew up in Brooklyn and Long Island. I had more black friends than white and maybe I carry the 'disease' but I have to tell you, my 'wills and desires' have very very often been 'denied in any circumstance by people of all colors, sometimes rightfully so, sometimes, in my opinion, not. I do not take one iota of your rage and or frustration away, I respect your perspective but as one wise black man pulled me aside and told me after I was harrassed by a gang of men of color, "I just wanted to tell you, we're all not like that". I already knew it, but I was touched. Peace.
12
@Leslie
You ask a good question, 'why the uproar'? My answer is an honest one of frustration. It has seemingly been an unending cacophony of voices denounceing racism at every opportunity. To now approve it as somehow 'valid' only when it is people of color seemingly making new rules on a whim, explanations not withstanding (separate but equal?) is at best confusing. Would it therefore be alright for white people to do the same? I would not have thought so, but with this development, you could not honestly denounce it, could you?
12
@Leslie Its not about making a community. Other “nonwhite” racial groups given the privilege of participation. This is targeted exclusion. This is the same as “Irish need not apply” signs in New York at the turn of the century.
I understand why a group wants to eliminate trolls. I get it.
The negative of exclusion is it becomes another source of your personal echo chamber; a place where your perspective is continually affirmed and there is less likelihood to listen to perspectives of those that have a different worldview.
I guess it’s who we are as a society.
71
@Rick What you call a "personal echo chamber" might just be a designated space where there aren't individuals trying to kill you, metaphorically or in reality.
43
If you’re in a minority group in our society then you are continually exposed to other viewpoints. All. Day. Long. In an ideal world, anyone could participate in any forum on the Internet - but we live in a world that is inherently racist. Perhaps the members of the Country Club get tired of defending themselves against trolls and explaining themselves to well-meaning white folks like myself. I’m glad they have this safe space.
71
@Rick I don't see it as creating an "echo chamber" but rather as black people making spaces for themselves where they can discuss and share what it means to be black in America. If/when our culture changes and is less rooted in bigotry, maybe the need for safe spaces will diminish, but we are a long way off from that.
23
Very good thought provoking article and I enjoyed reading it. I don’t see why having a closed forum on the internet would be too disturbing for some people to handle. This group of individuals is drawing boundaries around who they choose to interact with. We ALL do that in some form or another. What’s the problem? For the people that feel “discriminated” against move on to a forum that does welcome your input.
124
@Andrea because of the target exclusion of white people. As the article states, it is about excluding one group.
3
I see no lies in those posts.
6
Who cares. Reddit is not a legitimate source for anything.
68
@Jim Thank you Jim. Anyone, black or white, who spends this much time on social media needs to spend more time communicating in the real world. Social media and echo chambers are not healthy. I have seen so many people get sucked into Reddit and they end up in a worse place than where they started. Just say no.
68
Interesting, one of my grandchildren is a quarter black but his skin is as white as could be and his hair is blond but that doesn’t change the fact that he has African roots.
25
@MALINA with respect, what is the purpose of this comment? I say this as someone who is not black, and genuinely confused. Unlike the historical days of the one drop rule and labeling of quadroons and octoroons just to put more people into slavery, a large part of the modern black experience is how you’re treated by a society that perceives you as black. If you’re not perceived as black, you have a very different experience.
The subreddit is open to all those who identify as black, and to those in my kids’ school would be called Allies. If your concern is my grandson who wants to post on here could be excluded, it’s pretty clear he could just write to the moderators about his background and send pictures of his family etc.
But if your concern is Boo hoo this is mean, it would make my grandson feel excluded, you can take heart that he is also excluded from getting pulled over for driving while black, followed around in stores, extra security checks at the airport, etc.
17
Truly sad, polarization and exclusion is the road to more hatred.
63
Not sure if this is what I would've done, but, given the amount of bad actors and posers on social media, I can understand their position. I myself have definitely caught white people pretending to be black on comment threads, and they're doing it to make their political views seem tolerable. It's frustrating that someone with hateful views toward your culture borrows your cultural identity for political influence. I just hope this new policy doesn't lead to "reverse paper bag test." But what's to stop someone from submitting another person's photo? Anyway, until major social media companies can figure out a way to get a handle on the misinformation and hate speech, there aren't a lot of options left to moderators. Talking to these types of users is pointless because they're just there to spread misinformation and propoganda, not to have serious discussions. They're also hard to ignore without just leaving the forum altogether, which basically kills whatever online community there is. Maybe the group can arrange in person meet-ups in different locations?
9
@Jmart You need to write your user name on a forearm and take a picture.
You'd need to be pretty dedicated to ask a black person if you could write your reddit user name on their forearm and take a picture of it. And, you'd need to be friends with a black person who is OK with that.
17
@Baltimark You can see that several of the pictures just wrote their username on a piece of paper, not their actual forearm
2
@Baltimark
Was there a requirement that participants be longtime Reddit users? I didn't see that in the article but perhaps I missed it. All a white person would have to do is find an image of a "black arm" online, superimpose his name on it and send it in. Not that hard.
I don't have any social media accounts (except for a FB page I was required to get for work. Don't use it), so my experience with Reddit is zero. But I understand its an open system. It seems to me that the managers of this community want it both ways: to both open and closed at the same time. That has never worked before and I'm guessing its not going to work now.
Another thought - if people are showing skin color, how long until black on black bigotry starts? Will the old "paper bag" test be applied?
9
How do they know for sure that the participants are sending pictures of their own arm and not the arm of someone else? This does not appear to be a difficult challenge for someone who has nothing better to do than play the role of an an imposter, but it is also possible that there is an under-estimation of the diversity of thinking within the "black community." After all, some African-Americans voted for Donald Trump. Although I am a old white male without children, my political views align more closely to African-American grandmothers. That said, identity politics divides the working class rather than unites it. Race is only one of many factors that shape the views of an individual. Even people in a small nuclear family can express a wide diversity of view so why would all people of color think the same?
8
@Robert Scull Well, there is no "know for sure", but I'd like to meet the white person who goes up to a black person and says, "I'd like to write my reddit user name on your forearm and take a picture of it."
"Why?"
"Oh, so I can pretend to be a black person on reddit. Cool?"
29
@Baltimark Actually, that sounds like the opening gambit of a profound conversation.
3
@Robert Scull The moderators are not trying to imply that all people of color think the same (in contradiction to several people in this comment section who have mentioned "echo chambers"). They are only trying to limit certain discussions about being black to people who have that experience, or have proven that they will contribute positively. I imagine that differing viewpoints are welcomed as long as they are offered in good faith. As a disclaimer, I don't use Reddit.
2
So... it would seem that blackness is not, in this case, a social construct.
This kind of moderation doesn't really bother me; if the moderators want to exclude people on the basis of skin color, and they can get away with it, then more power to them.
However, I do think this is a data point, among a multitude, indicating that racial politics and racial sensitivities tend to become self-parodying.
57
Well, the mods could have just said the forum is exclusively for users who are black-identified, no verification necessary, but clearly that wasn’t going to work because some white users weren’t respecting the intention of the forum. Hence the need for a very imperfect, but more enforceable solution.
2