![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 9 to 33 of 89. Go back in thread:
Posted by Dinah on January 13, 2003, at 19:29:47
In reply to Re: anti-Semitism, posted by Noa on January 13, 2003, at 18:53:16
I agree. I think there are few things less civil than racism.
I also don't think it facilitates the support of people who feel victimized and angry to allow statements that will be likely to offend a fair number of posters, thus reinforcing the feelings.
Posted by wendy b. on January 13, 2003, at 21:58:36
In reply to Re: anti-Semitism, posted by Dr. Bob on January 13, 2003, at 13:03:22
> Sometimes it's hard to know exactly where to draw the line.
It may be hard for you here, Bob, but in soooo many other cases, where there actually WAS a grey zone, you quickly rushed to judgement.
>I don't consider anti-Semitism civil, but at the same time I think there can be gray zones.There is no grey zone, here, Bob. Fuzzymind is calling Jews "money-grubbing" merely on the basis of their Jewish-ness. This is overtly racist...
> For example, someone might put down particular members of a group without putting down that whole group...But that's not the case here, Bob. He didn't only put down two people, he put down a whole cultural group.
> Also, I do want people who feel victimized and angry to be able to receive support here...
>
> Bob
As you can see, many posters have expressed sympathy and support *even though* Fuzzymind offended their senses of fairness and civility. I too feel extremely sorry and sad for Fuzzymind.I also don't think it's good to lay yourself open to criticism from people who might think you were being permissive toward Fuzzymind because he's Asian. Beyond all the other inconsistencies, it just looks bad.
Sorry, but to me, this situation needs a firmer hand.
sincerely,
Wendy
Posted by Lou Pilder on January 14, 2003, at 7:30:08
In reply to Re: anti-Semitism, posted by Dr. Bob on January 13, 2003, at 13:03:22
Dr. Bob,
A poster here wrote,[...2 jewish assholes...] and [...like a greedy jew...a money worshipping abusive jew...]
You wrote that [ ...we want people that feel victimised and angry to recieve support here...]
I am jewish. Are you saying that because I am jewish that [I] am victimising this poster here? If so, do you mean that I should allow this community to write what I feel is defameing to me so that the poster in question could get "support" and use jews to vent his/her "anger"? Am I to be a scapegoat here for the posters that want to use me for such?
Are you also saying that [I] am an "asshole" because I am a jew because the poster labels jews as "assholes"? Are you saying that I have to allow this community to write what I feel is defameing to me so that the poster in question can get "support"?
Are you saying that jews [are] "greedy" and "abusive"? I am jewish and have made an honest living as a teacher and saleperson. I have raised 3 children and they have graduated with honors from the University of Cincinnati and I have never laid my hand on them or abused them in any other way. I represent one of the largest foundations for the prevention of child abuse in the world. I delivered meals on wheels for several years as a volunteer here in Cincinnati. Are you saying that because I am a jew that I should be portreyed as a person that abuses people? Are you saying that this community should allow jews, and me, to be defamed because the poster in question accuses jews of [worshiping money]and are [abusive] and that the poster should get "support" for having those type of feelings?
You have threatened me with expulsion from this community if I post that my God has a commandment to me to not have other Gods before Him. You say that I will be putting others down if I do. Are you saying that I will be guilty of putting people down and that this poster in question that writes [...jewish assholes...] and[...greedy jews...abusive jews...] will not put me down? Are you going to foster this type of "support" here ? I am proud to be a jew. I am not an "asshole" I am not "greedy". I am not "abusive". Is there a branch of psychiatry that condones your position here? If so, could you tell me that branch and give some reference that I can read about that branch?
Lou
Posted by OddipusRex on January 14, 2003, at 9:51:36
In reply to Re: anti-Semitism, posted by Dr. Bob on January 13, 2003, at 13:03:22
Fuzzy also said he was thinking of visiting the holocaust memorial to talk to survivors because he related to them. I don't think that sounds like anti-semitism to me. Yes he made a poor choice of words and made some people uncomfortable. Give him a please be civil under the vast umbrella of not posting anything that might make anyone anywhere feel put down. But it's something else again to start accusing people of anti-semitism. I think his problem was with the people who bullied him-the individuals. But their ethnicity was relevant because they were bullying him because he was different from them! I don't think it's necessary to generalize what he said to all Jews.
Bringing up a stereotype was a VERY bad idea. I think you could ask Fuzzy to watch his language without accusing him of anti-semitism.Let's not forget that he endured horrible bigotry and racist bullying. He was the victim here.
>
> > Sometimes it's hard to know exactly where to draw the line. I don't consider anti-Semitism civil, but at the same time I think there can be gray zones. For example, someone might put down particular members of a group without putting down that whole group...
>
> Also, I do want people who feel victimized and angry to be able to receive support here...
>
> Bob
Posted by Dinah on January 14, 2003, at 10:07:11
In reply to Re: anti-Semitism » Dr. Bob, posted by OddipusRex on January 14, 2003, at 9:51:36
I think that's the whole idea behind "Please be civil"'s or blocks too. That they are addressed to particular actions, not to people per se.
I actually feel a bit uncomfortable discussing fuzzymind without his being part of the conversation.
But I do propose an addition to the civility guidelines that defines bigoted or racist statements as uncivil under the rules of the site. That removes some of the personal quality from any disciplinary action, and forestalls a discussion of intent or overall feelings towards a race or religion, etc. The statements would be considered uncivil, not the poster.
Posted by Lou Pilder on January 14, 2003, at 11:03:11
In reply to Re: More anti-Semitism from this person AGAIN « JenR, posted by Phil on January 13, 2003, at 6:42:34
Phil,
Thank you very much for posting your perspective about the post in question. You wrote,[If they were Christian, would he have said these two Christian guys...]
You see the crux of this and I appreciate your courage to stand up and say that [...you were offended and you are not even jewish...]
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on January 14, 2003, at 11:21:10
In reply to Re: -No room for racist remarks on Babble, posted by Noa on January 13, 2003, at 18:42:44
Noa,
Thank you very much for seeing the crux of the issue presented by the post that contained the phrase,[...2 jewish assholes..]and [...like a greedy jew], and [...a money worshiping abusive jew...]. You wrote that you [...are offended by the expressions...]. I am proud that you have the courage to write that they are offended by the type of statements that the poster in question has wrote. You wrote, [...there is no place for racism on this board...]. You wrote [...it is not necessary to generalise the hatred that you feel toward those individuals into a whole group of people...]. The point here is that you see the post in question as in the light that you have posted, and that shows that, at least, there are people that feel that the post in question can carry the import that you percieve. Now if the rules here are to not post ,[...what has the potential for others to feel offended or put down...] then the post in question violates that civility rule by the fact that you percieve it that way, and so do others.
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on January 14, 2003, at 11:30:20
In reply to Re: anti-Semitism - Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on January 13, 2003, at 19:29:47
Dinah,
Thank you for taking the time to write your objection to the post in question when you wrote,[...I don't think it ficilitates the support of people...to allow statements that will likely offend others...thus reinforcing the feelings...]
This is a great obsevation for you indicate that there is [reinforcement], not [support]. This shows, at least, that there are posters here that do not think that Dr. Bob's position relevant to this issue "facilitates" "support".
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on January 14, 2003, at 11:35:14
In reply to Re: you can't just let this one go... » Dr. Bob, posted by wendy b. on January 13, 2003, at 21:58:36
Wendy,
Thank you very much for posting your perceptions about the post in question here. You wrote,[...called jews money grubbing...that is not the case here...he put down a whole culteral group...]
This shows, at least, that someone here does not agree that the post is in a "grey zone".
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on January 14, 2003, at 11:52:17
In reply to Re: anti-Semitism, posted by Dr. Bob on January 13, 2003, at 13:03:22
Dr. Bob,
I am requesting that you take the following action concering the post in question that uses the phrases, [...jewish assholes....greedy jews....abusive jews...]
The action that I would like to see taken here is to ask the writer of the post in question to post an apology to the board to any and all that he [may] have offended. As a member of any community, an apology is accepted by the others in the community to be an act of good faith and it restores the one to the community in good standing. As far as the suggestion to admonish the poster, I feel that it [goes without saying] that the poster in question knows that he/she is recieving an admonoishment by being askde to apologise to the board.
Lou
Posted by OddipusRex on January 14, 2003, at 12:00:43
In reply to Re: you can't just let this one go... » Dr. Bob, posted by wendy b. on January 13, 2003, at 21:58:36
What's that supposed to mean? What people are you referring to? Why does it look bad to you? What's being Asian got to do with it in your mind? I don't think Bob should base his decisions on how things might look to anyone especially someone who's basing his reasoning on racial/ethnic characteristics.
>
> I also don't think it's good to lay yourself open to criticism from people who might think you were being permissive toward Fuzzymind because he's Asian. Beyond all the other inconsistencies, it just looks bad.
>
>
Posted by OddipusRex on January 14, 2003, at 12:06:47
In reply to Huh????! » wendy b., posted by OddipusRex on January 14, 2003, at 12:00:43
Roundtrip fares for 228 dollars!! I hate arguments. And on behalf of Dr Bob may I remind myself to please keep it administrative.
Posted by wendy b. on January 14, 2003, at 14:41:38
In reply to Huh????! » wendy b., posted by OddipusRex on January 14, 2003, at 12:00:43
It means what I said it meant. "People" could be anyone here, or anyone looking at the board for the first time, or a book reviewer, or a peer of Dr. Bob's.
If you think I'm being covertly "reverse-racist," sorry, but I said it could give the *appearance* to others of some kind of favoritism. I just think it looks bad. That's all.
As for your less administrative post above, I hate arguments, too, so we agree on that at least!
Best,
Wendy
> What's that supposed to mean? What people are you referring to? Why does it look bad to you? What's being Asian got to do with it in your mind? I don't think Bob should base his decisions on how things might look to anyone especially someone who's basing his reasoning on racial/ethnic characteristics.
>
>
>
>
> >
> > I also don't think it's good to lay yourself open to criticism from people who might think you were being permissive toward Fuzzymind because he's Asian. Beyond all the other inconsistencies, it just looks bad.
> >
> >
>
Posted by wendy b. on January 14, 2003, at 14:44:30
In reply to Re: you can't just let this one go... » wendy b., posted by Lou Pilder on January 14, 2003, at 11:35:14
Lou,
Trying to call a spade a spade without getting blocked around here is quite the challenge, no? I'm not Jewish except in spirit, but the comments from that thread are quite upsetting to me.
Best,
Wendy
> Wendy,
> Thank you very much for posting your perceptions about the post in question here. You wrote,[...called jews money grubbing...that is not the case here...he put down a whole culteral group...]
> This shows, at least, that someone here does not agree that the post is in a "grey zone".
> Lou
Posted by Noa on January 14, 2003, at 15:45:15
In reply to Re: anti-Semitism » Dr. Bob, posted by OddipusRex on January 14, 2003, at 9:51:36
To me it isn't an issue of labeling a person as an anti-semite or any label of any kind. I am speaking about setting limits on the language that is offensive. I think people need guidelines and limits to remind us of what is acceptable language on this board.
I have no doubt that Fuzzymind experience racism against him. That is not at issue. I think that I would like to support him in his pain at having experienced such bigotry. But I have also been the target of bigotry during my lifetime, and I surely do not see that as a reason to permit me to turn around and use racist or ethnic slurs toward others.
I have nothing against the poster here, but I did ask him to not use language that is offensive to me. And I think that Dr. Bob has a role as moderator in setting the tone, including communicating that racial or ethnic slurs should not be used by participants.
Posted by Noa on January 14, 2003, at 16:10:25
In reply to Re: anti-Semitism » OddipusRex, posted by Noa on January 14, 2003, at 15:45:15
I have revised the subject title, if that helps.
It is the behavior, not the person that is offensive to me.
I have no wish to vilify Fuzzy, and would not have felt a need to comment on this at all had Dr. Bob just set limits acc. to the board guidelines. To me, it probably would have been done at that--point out that these comments are offensive to some, please don't use them, etc. etc. Over and done with, everyone continues posting as normal.
To me, I am willing to give any poster the benefit of the doubt, and think of the comments as an error in judgement, an "oops" that with a reminder from Dr. Bob, would not be repeated. No big deal at that point.
But to me the bigger deal is Dr. Bob's error in judgment about the impact of the comments, or his assessment of them as being "gray area", which I disagree with, and that is where I felt I needed to comment. I think Dr. Bob miscalcuated this one big time, because although he was not uncomfortable with the comments, many of us were. Now, his decision to ignore is moot--this is getting way more attention than it would have had he just given a simple limit reminder.
I do not think it is helpful to a distressed poster to allow that poster, no matter how distressed, to post comments that contain slurs and are offensive to members of this online community. And it is not helpful to the community, either.
My beef now is not with Fuzzy, but with Dr. Bob, whom I admire and respect. So I am respectfully asking him to reconsider his decision, which I feel was a mistake.
As for Fuzzy, I hope he will come back to the board and feel welcome, as long as he leaves the slurs at the door.
Posted by Dinah on January 14, 2003, at 16:12:54
In reply to Re: anti-Semitic language--Rex, posted by Noa on January 14, 2003, at 16:10:25
Posted by Lou Pilder on January 14, 2003, at 16:14:24
In reply to Re: anti-Semitism » OddipusRex, posted by Noa on January 14, 2003, at 15:45:15
Noa,
Thank you for your post . You wrote,[ ...it is not the issue of {lableing a person as an anti-Semite}...]but,[...the language...] and that what he experianced ,[...is {not} a reason to permit racist or ethnic slurs toward others...]. Your post shows that, at least, one poster ,other than me, is cognizant of that point .
Best regards,
Lou
Posted by OddipusRex on January 14, 2003, at 16:55:48
In reply to Re: anti-Semitic language--Rex, posted by Noa on January 14, 2003, at 16:10:25
> I have revised the subject title, if that helps.
Yes it does. I think that's a lot clearer.
>
> To me, I am willing to give any poster the benefit of the doubt, and think of the comments as an error in judgement, an "oops" that with a reminder from Dr. Bob, would not be repeated. No big deal at that point.
>
> But to me the bigger deal is Dr. Bob's error in judgment about the impact of the comments, or his assessment of them as being "gray area", which I disagree with, and that is where I felt I needed to comment.~~~~I don't consider anti-Semitism civil, but at the same time I think there can be gray zones. For example, someone might put down particular members of a group without putting down that whole group...~~~~~~Quote from Bob
Noa do you think it is ever possible to put down particular members of a group without putting down the whole group? Should the phrases hypocritical Christian or pedophile priest or drunken Irishman or Black drug dealer or white lynch mob or treacherous female be forbidden too? How would you word a rule on forbidden phrases? Were you offended that his tormenters were identified as Jewish or just the particular insulting phrases used?
Actually I cringed when I read the post too but I've cringed at other things posted on Babble too.
Posted by Lou Pilder on January 14, 2003, at 17:59:50
In reply to Re: anti-Semitic language--Rex, posted by Noa on January 14, 2003, at 16:10:25
Noa,
Thank you again in this revised post of yours for writing, [...I do not think that it is helpfull to a distressed poster to allow that poster...to post comments that contain slurs and are offensive to menbers of this...community.And it is not helpfull to the community either...]
The parts that I appreciate are that:
1) you write that you think that the poster in question is not being helped by allowing the slurs
2) you write that the community is also not being helped by allowing the slurs.
I believe that this is important , for if the slurs are allowed, then others can come to this community and write things that import that particular ethnic groups are the cause of their distress. This could lead to the community becoming a venue for hate.
You wrote that you think that the slurs should not be allowed to be posted in this on-line community. I base this on when you wrote,[...as long as he leaves the slurs at the door...].
I agree with you wholeheartedly that when the Gate to this community is opened to all, that the restraint to "leave the slurs at the Gate...]should be self-evident, for this is a mental-health community and ethnic slurs, as you have just pointed out, are not {helpfull}, even to the poster of them.
Thanks,
Lou
Posted by Noa on January 14, 2003, at 18:53:15
In reply to Re: anti-Semitic language--Rex » Noa, posted by OddipusRex on January 14, 2003, at 16:55:48
Rex, to answer your question--I don't think any of that kind of language is appropriate to a board like this. This community requires a certain amount of safety for all members, and the use of negative stereotypes puts that safety at risk. If one is describing a person in one's life, and the person happens to have certain traits that coincide with a sterotypes associated with their ethnic or racial group, and especially if that stereotype is often used as an ethnic or racial slur, then I think it is the civil thing to do to refrain from using that kind of language here on this board because of its propensity to hurt others here.
In any event, by saying in the post,
"I am a racist myself"
I think that Fuzzy himself was acknowledging that the language was racist and that should be enough to make one stop and think about how it will affect others.
What one says in private speech is another matter.
Posted by Noa on January 14, 2003, at 18:53:57
In reply to Re: anti-Semitic language--Rex » Noa, posted by Lou Pilder on January 14, 2003, at 17:59:50
Posted by IsoM on January 14, 2003, at 19:53:41
In reply to Re: anti-Semitic language-- » OddipusRex, posted by Noa on January 14, 2003, at 18:53:15
Jumping in with a quick remark & then trying to stay out of it.
The older generation grew up with many bigoted expressions that were just taken as everyday words with little thought to how many were hurt. Expressions like "in a coon's age" or "Chinaman" instead of Chinese. Nigger was once thought acceptable (I've heard that it comes from nigre, the Spanish word for black, but I'm not positive). Even my Mom (who's 80 years old) uses words that I cringe at.
Often those who are older will use expressions that aren't suitable now. I'm glad that many words are being dropped from polite speech. If we were the ones these were directed at, we'd feel hurt too. But the lengths to which some have gone to keep things politically correct is ridiculous & many can see that. I'm never sure whether the correct term is "handicapped" or "impaired" or "disadvantaged" or what now is the preferred term. It's changed too often.
Perhaps becasue the extent of this new political correctness, some think there's no need to stop using older slang expressions that hurt. But if we make the change to a new manner of expression that considers feelings, cultures, & backgrounds of everyone, hopefully over time, most will be spoken of in a respectful manner, even if they're not always thought of with respect.
I'm all for keeping all prejudiced expressions out of our speech. Instead of saying "greedy Jews" why not say a greedy guy? Does the fact one is Jewish help our understanding of the situation? Did it clear up anything we needed to know about? If not, then it shouldn't be mentioned. There's as many greedy people in almost all cultures. If, however, this person was to steal from a synagogue then the fact he was Jewish might matter. Identifying a person by his/her culture or background rather than qualitites does little to enlighten any one.
Posted by Lou Pilder on January 14, 2003, at 19:58:08
In reply to Re: anti-Semitic language--, posted by IsoM on January 14, 2003, at 19:53:41
IsoM,
Thanks,
Lou
Posted by jane d on January 14, 2003, at 20:24:34
In reply to Re: you can't just let this one go... » Dr. Bob, posted by wendy b. on January 13, 2003, at 21:58:36
> I also don't think it's good to lay yourself open to criticism from people who might think you were being permissive toward Fuzzymind because he's Asian. Beyond all the other inconsistencies, it just looks bad.Wendy,
I'm sure you didn't mean to say this since I know that you are not yourself racist. But, automatically concluding, without any evidence, that a decision was made on racial lines could in itself be construed as a form of racism. Perhaps there are some people out there who might come across the site and come to that conclusion but I think that they are rare and I don't see why their biases should be taken into account.
Jane
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.