So, it seems you are saying that racism only counts if it's systemic and endemic, but not when it's only on an individual scale?
As a white boy, I WAS part of the "ethnic minority" (while simultaneously being part of the overall "ethnic majority"), I lived in East Palo Alto when it was the murder capital of the US and over 90% "minority". I repeatedly encountered racism against whites in a community that was predominantly black. Does that not count because they only held power in their community (where I lived)? Does it not count because I eventually moved? I don't understand...why would that not be "real scale" racism by a minority group against an "ethnic majority"?
It seems to me like you are stretching to say institutional racism is only one sided because it's MOSTLY one sided.
I feel like most of your examples are really more about (perceived) social/financial status than race....not entirely but mostly.

I have an ex which got me involved in this whole "Mystery School" thing and I regret the money dumped into that racket.

Well... no, no, it was a pretty decent experience getting my body felt up by a group of mostly women during "Reiki" sessions and the weird goddess orgies -- not too shabby for an ignorant white boy.

That's right...the North American white boy uses all the parts.

Right up until the last comma I took your comment a completely different way. I thought you meant that if ZImmerman had killed a White boy in self defense, then something totally different would have happened.
1)The media would never have gotten involved.
2) Zimmerman would have been arrested on the site, charged with murder and unless the kid was a tattooed, white trash, white supremacist, gang member, Zimmerman would be in jail.
But you would never have known about it as there would be no cause to stand in the pulpit, no social ire that the Media could try to raise. They would ignore the whole situation, exactly how they would have ignored it if Zimmerman had been Black.
Seems that unfortunately the guy in the video is correct when he says that, "The life of a black man only has value when it is taken by a white man".

To that point it seems that Chicago is perfectly happy to let the violence in their city continue unchecked and unanswered. It seems that what is happening in Chicago barely get's any national media play. Certainly plays into the theory that the media is liberally biased and is trying to protect Rahm Emmanuel and President Obama from any backlash. Especially since they all seemed to project that Rahm could eventually run for President back when he won the mayoral race.

I got yelled at by a black person for saying something like this. He was right though: I'm just a stupid American white boy. My grandpappy was dumb, my daddy been dumb and so I am done dumber than dumb. Ignorant actually.

But I don't worship no GOD, so at least I got that goin for me. Hell. I got that going for me.

But if there is no hell then it don't matter anyhow We're all biological machines without a destiny, just flapping our various flaps; the constant filibuster on happiness.

*related=http://videosift.com/video/Blacking-Up-White-boys-Identity-and-Hip-Hop

Blacking Up - White boys, Identity and Hip Hop has been added as a related post - related requested by chingalera.

Not really....If ya wanna critique, these folks are way too white...seeing them perform does little justice to their efforts filmed or otherwise embodied in recorded tracks on YT with a wannabe clever album cover...To Me, they strain at sucking and are incurably Caucasian....That coming form a white boy, that makes and loves music....these dweebs' sound make my skin crawl for an escape hatch away from hipsters...:)

And since you love em so much, i guess i need to copy this review to one of their sifted viddies (probably pimped by you or another incurable white person with no ear for talent) straining for attention....Yeah. Pretty much recoil from their sound and vibe altogether, they embarrass their creed and associative alliance with blood kin, wish they'd stop trying !

I'm not quite sure if smartphone designers have planned this vertical format. Take a video camera for example. You wouldn't hold it vertical to shoot a video, would you? I think you would prefer the horizontal format.

The reaseon why some people shoot videos vertical with their phones is because the common smartphone is designed to be used and held vertically. The landscape view is "just" an addon.

In my opinion there is and always will be a difference in taking a picture or shooting a video in a vertical format. A vertical video just feels wrong. Maybe youtube will fit their players to vertical formats, but I don't see that in the next three or four years.

>> ^poolcleaner:

>> ^ypsilon:
Vertical Video Syndrome!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Bt9zSfinwFA
#!
But the kid is cool

Adaptation applies to video formats, doesn't it?
The vertical format is essentially a portrait view, which although is not typical to video, is acceptable for still frames. Why? Because of accepted status quo introduced by standards required for viewing and filming because of the costs of the analog systems used to create film/video. i.e. A time when you couldn't turn your television, projection systems, or computer monitors sideways -- something that a lot more people are doing nowadays; I have a vertical monitor at work and I've seen a few massive vertical monitors used for business menus or marques. We've been due a new acceptable format for YEARS. I believe this new, viable format is the portrait view that smartphones have opened, but it's the uninitiated and unbiased that will accept this format, not us old fogies.
Now, you can go ahead and list off reasons for preferring landscape view, especially citing the typical field of view for human sight, but it doesn't invalidate the choice, considering the media was created with a camera phone, which is designed with these options in mind. Camera phone is a sub-medium, which offers it additional standards, one of which is portrait view. If the subject choice is a human, we stand vertical, so portrait really is best suited for capturing human form. (Also, caputring a BJ is best done in portrait, but that's just my perverted opinion.)
Quick, someone invent a triangle camera!

>> ^poolcleaner:

>> ^ypsilon:
Vertical Video Syndrome!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Bt9zSfinwFA
#!
But the kid is cool

Adaptation applies to video formats, doesn't it?
The vertical format is essentially a portrait view, which although is not typical to video, is acceptable for still frames. Why? Because of accepted status quo introduced by standards required for viewing and filming because of the costs of the analog systems used to create film/video. i.e. A time when you couldn't turn your television, projection systems, or computer monitors sideways -- something that a lot more people are doing nowadays; I have a vertical monitor at work and I've seen a few massive vertical monitors used for business menus or marques. We've been due a new acceptable format for YEARS. I believe this new, viable format is the portrait view that smartphones have opened, but it's the uninitiated and unbiased that will accept this format, not us old fogies.
Now, you can go ahead and list off reasons for preferring landscape view, especially citing the typical field of view for human sight, but it doesn't invalidate the choice, considering the media was created with a camera phone, which is designed with these options in mind. Camera phone is a sub-medium, which offers it additional standards, one of which is portrait view. If the subject choice is a human, we stand vertical, so portrait really is best suited for capturing human form. (Also, caputring a BJ is best done in portrait, but that's just my perverted opinion.)
Quick, someone invent a triangle camera!


IMHO it's not that it's portrait, it's that everything is geared to landscape. This video has more black space than content, why? Why isn't the YouTube embed portrait?

>> ^ypsilon:

Vertical Video Syndrome!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Bt9zSfinwFA
#!
But the kid is cool


Adaptation applies to video formats, doesn't it?

The vertical format is essentially a portrait view, which although is not typical to video, is acceptable for still frames. Why? Because of accepted status quo introduced by standards required for viewing and filming because of the costs of the analog systems used to create film/video. i.e. A time when you couldn't turn your television, projection systems, or computer monitors sideways -- something that a lot more people are doing nowadays; I have a vertical monitor at work and I've seen a few massive vertical monitors used for business menus or marques. We've been due a new acceptable format for YEARS. I believe this new, viable format is the portrait view that smartphones have opened, but it's the uninitiated and unbiased that will accept this format, not us old fogies.

Now, you can go ahead and list off reasons for preferring landscape view, especially citing the typical field of view for human sight, but it doesn't invalidate the choice, considering the media was created with a camera phone, which is designed with these options in mind. Camera phone is a sub-medium, which offers it additional standards, one of which is portrait view. If the subject choice is a human, we stand vertical, so portrait really is best suited for capturing human form. (Also, caputring a BJ is best done in portrait, but that's just my perverted opinion.)

Quick, someone invent a triangle camera!

>> ^chingalera:

There's very little good dub, rap, hip-hop anymore~
One of the most endeeeearing qualities being the propensity of ghetto-ass stoner white-boys to adopt some pseudo-Brooklyn accent and brag about how bad-ass they are~Bleeegh!



There's a lot of good rap and hip-hop these days.

They're not putting on any accents, they're from Chicago. That's how they sound.

And braggadocio in rap? How unusual!

There's very little good dub, rap, hip-hop anymore~

One of the most endeeeearing qualities being the propensity of ghetto-ass stoner white-boys to adopt some pseudo-Brooklyn accent and brag about how bad-ass they are~Bleeegh!

She'd be worried that she's black and confused about her race?>> ^raverman:

Classic comedy reusing a standard anti-homosexual trope
Don't think so?
Imagine she just kissed a black boy and needs to make out a white boy so she doesn't feel dirty or confused any more.
Still not inferring a negative stereotype?

Classic comedy reusing a standard anti-homosexual trope

Don't think so?

Imagine she just kissed a black boy and needs to make out a white boy so she doesn't feel dirty or confused any more.

Still not inferring a negative stereotype?