This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 |
@ Generalrelative has reverted my edit, my edit making the article read, describing "Reverse racism" in the lede:
"is a term which describes situations where typically advantaged people are relegated to inferior positions or denied social opportunities to benefit racial and ethnic minorities. [1] The concept holds that affirmative action and similar color-conscious programs for redressing racial inequality are forms of anti-white racism, with accusations thereof seen in countries such as the United States and South Africa. [2]"
This user's sole reasoning is that this has been "discussed" "extensively" on the talk page. Now, it is clear that my wording here is sourced. To spell the first source out quite simply (Yee, Encyclopedia of Race, Ethnicity and Society), it reads outright,
"[T]he term reverse racism (or reverse discrimination) has been coined to describe situations where typically advantaged people are relegated to inferior positions or denied social opportunities to benefit racial and ethnic minorities".
This is a source that has been used in this article in describing reverse racism's similar relationship to reverse discrimination, but strangely editors here insist that "reverse racism" is solely the concept referring to reverse-racism in examples of claimed "anti-white racism". It is clear that Yee's description is much more definitive, referring to the concept of "typically advantaged people", as opposed to just white people, outright, which is indeed where the term is more commonly used. I have quoted almost word-for-word of Yee's quote in my reverted first sentence.
Secondly, if there is emphasis on "anti-white racism" accusations in the first paragraph, that can only be improved by adding context. Again, it is clear that the term "anti-white racism" is linked - but not definitively so - with "reverse racism", and so the context I added was simply, "accusations thereof [of anti-white racism] seen in countries such as the United States and South Africa", which are mentioned extensively throughout the article.
Who here seriously believes that reverse-racism is fundamentally the concept that "affirmative action and similar color-conscious programs for redressing racial inequality are forms of anti-white racism."? Indeed this refers to the concept contextually, e.g., in the US and South Africa (which most sources write of), but their wording is never exactly as fundamental as Yee's definition. I am reverting my edit back as it is much clearer. Zilch-nada ( talk) 22:59, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
for example...because it is expanding on a more complicated point, and continues with
However...because it explains that scholars do not generally accept this as a starting premise. Decontextualizing a source in this way is not appropriate, but as NightHeron said, you will find very little appetite for re-litigating this yet again. Grayfell ( talk) 23:36, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
Belief in reverse racism is widespread in the United States. The beliefs of Americans, especially conservatives, are described in detail throughout the article, particularly under § Public attitudes. If published, reliable sources focus on the lack of empirical evidence, then so do we, whatever the " silent majority" may believe. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 04:44, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Yee is giving a very general overview of various conceptions of racism. We tend to rely on more in-depth sources such as Ansell and Garner, who each devote a section specifically to the idea of reverse racism.The argument that Yee is more
definitivehas been heard and rejected. One new point: a term coined to describe XYZ and one which describes XYZ have very different meanings; the latter statement implies more strongly that XYZ actually exists, which is misleading. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 04:07, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Plenty (most) of articles speaking of reverse racism in relation to anti-white racism do so in American contexts– Which sources describe reverse racism in any other context than the US & SA? — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 04:33, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
unduly limits the lead sentence. "Reverse racism" has been invoked in other countries besides the U.S. – not only South Africa as described in the article but also the UK; see Song (2014) ... and Australia; see Nelson et al. (2018) .— Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 05:02, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
very clear national contextto the topic, not suggesting a specific addition to the article. Once again, we need a published source to directly support any material added. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 05:52, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
seriously believesabout the topic is irrelevant; we go by published, reliable sources, not editors' beliefs, opinions, or experiences. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 04:15, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Reverse racism is a concept commonly associated with conservative opposition to affirmative action and other color-conscious victories of the civil rights movement in the United States and anti-racist movements abroad.We've been over this before. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 05:19, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
While traditional forms of racism involve prejudice and discrimination on the part of whites against blacks, reverse racism is alleged to be a new form of anti-white racism practiced by blacks and/or the so-called civil rights establishment. [2] — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 05:31, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
anti-white racism practiced by blacksrefers in part to
anti-racist movements abroad. The one is literally stated right after the other. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 06:04, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
in any and all contexts where white supremacy has diminished. White loss of privilege is experienced by some as at the expense of black gains, citing South Africa as the main example. [3] The connection between "anti-white racism" and "anti-racist movements abroad" (i.e. doing away with white supremacy) seems pretty clear. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 06:15, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
At its most general level, such [reverse racism] debate has come to bear in any and all contexts where white supremacy has diminished.[4] Seems pretty definitive to me. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 06:32, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
contexts of the reverse racism debatebesides places where white supremacy has diminished, what are they? — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 06:58, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
white loss of privilegeto show what happens
in any and all contexts where white supremacy has diminished, not just in one or two countries. Once again, what is meant by "white loss of privilege" if not perceived "anti-white racism"? — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 07:07, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
any and all contexts where white supremacy has diminishedis the only "example" Ansell gives of where the reverse racism "debate" has come to bear, I'd say it's not an example but a generalized description. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 07:27, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
the term reverse racism (or reverse discrimination) has been coined to describe situations where typically advantaged people are relegated to inferior positions or denied social opportunities to benefit racial and ethnic minorities, or, in some instances, women.[5] Why are we not talking about adding "women" to the definition in the lead sentence? Could it be that Yee's definition is intentionally broader than the specific topic of reverse racism in that it encompasses other forms of "reverse discrimination" as well? Not very "definitive" at all, is it? — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 15:19, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
in any and all contexts where white supremacy has diminished, we can infer that those are the most noteworthy contexts unless and until a different source says otherwise. You can say that's not "definitive", but so what? Wikipedia describes topics according to due weight, not whether they satisfy some arbitrary standard of definitiveness. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 12:30, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Reverse racism is a concept commonly associated with conservative opposition to affirmative action ... reverse racism is alleged to be a new form of anti-white racism. This directly supports the statement in the lead. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 15:51, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Just because something is the lead sentence of an article and has the form “[article title] is…”, that does not means that what follows is necessarily a definition. For example, Great replacement is an article that in some sense is similar to Reverse racism. Its first sentence, like that in Reverse racism, is not a definition of what the term in the title means, but rather is a description of what its importance is in the real world: “The Great replacement […] is a white nationalist far-right conspiracy theory…”
By the way, I hope you’ve noticed that most of the 7 editors besides you have argued against your edit, and none have supported it. Undoubtedly other editors are not inclined to enter the discussion because it deals with issues that have already been extensively discussed before, because there is near-zero likelihood that the consensus on these matters will be changed now, and because reading and responding to your WP:WALLOFTEXT is a time sink. Please read WP:DROPTHESTICK. NightHeron ( talk) 14:18, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
opened up, the procedure for doing so is described at WP:CONTENTDISPUTE. Knock yourself out. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 14:37, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
a mere three editors? What on earth are you talking about? I count 7 questioning your POV in this thread alone. And that is leaving aside previous discussions where this matter was already settled. Having one's views confirmed by consensus and continuing to edit in accordance with that consensus is in no way "holding onto the stick". That's absurd. You are of course free to post at a noticeboard, but you've certainly been afforded a heaping measure of AGF here so far. We are not, after all, required to WP:SATISFY you. Generalrelative ( talk) 21:24, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Reverse racism is a concept commonly associated with conservative opposition to affirmative action ... reverse racism is alleged to be a new form of anti-white racism, Bax (2018):
Many Americans—including some people of color—staunchly believe in the existence of reverse racism, or racism against whites, Feagin (2001, p. 250):
whites, especially white men, have recently claimed the status of victims of discrimination. Using oxymoronic terms like reverse discrimination, whites have successfully pushed aside the central issue of the systemic racism still routinely oppressing Americans of color, Garner (2017, p. 14):
terms such as 'reverse racism' (Box 9.4) gain currency [...] the increasingly frequent assertion that programmes ranging from affirmative action to multiculturalism in the public arena end up placing white people at a systematic disadvantage, McKinney (2005, p. xx):
The racism my white students seem most comfortable discussing is so-called 'reverse' racism. Many feel that they as whites are facing racial victimization, Roussell et al. (2019):
Reverse racism is the idea that the Civil Rights Movement not only ended the subordination of communities of color in all aspects of social life but also simultaneously led to a similar subordination of Whites.
Whites, in self-defense, responded with the term 'reverse racism' in the face of affirmative action, which brings to mind 'Crow Jim,' the expression that Whites used to describe discrimination against Whites during the era of Jim Crow, [3] Ian Hawkins & Muniba Saleem (2022):
Reverse racism is the perception that White individuals experience discrimination, prejudice, or group-based bias because of the color of their skin, [4] and Bongki Woo (2018):
reverse racism, a concept holding that whites believe they are discriminated against as much as or more than racial/ethnic minorities. [5]
sometimes difficult to confirm because its existence may be based on one's perception of an interaction or situation.[6] Compared to the more in-depth sources cited above, Yee's definition is the opposite of a
full descriptionsince it leaves out the entire context relating to conservative opposition to affirmative action, perception of anti-white bias, etc. Fixating on the presence or absence of
specific national contextsdilutes this more important context stated in multiple RSes. Yee's definition also includes
womenamong perceived victims of reverse racism/discrimination. Are we proposing to add that to the lead sentence as well? It seems that Yee is intentionally talking about other forms of "reverse discrimination" along with "reverse racism". — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 01:28, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
References
Yee 2008
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Ansell p135
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).This article alleges that non whites are inferior to whites? How is this considered an academic description? How am I inferior to whites? That is nazi ideology, I am just as valid as whites, and superiority of whites is an outdated belief. Shameful. 172.59.197.239 ( talk) 11:56, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 |
@ Generalrelative has reverted my edit, my edit making the article read, describing "Reverse racism" in the lede:
"is a term which describes situations where typically advantaged people are relegated to inferior positions or denied social opportunities to benefit racial and ethnic minorities. [1] The concept holds that affirmative action and similar color-conscious programs for redressing racial inequality are forms of anti-white racism, with accusations thereof seen in countries such as the United States and South Africa. [2]"
This user's sole reasoning is that this has been "discussed" "extensively" on the talk page. Now, it is clear that my wording here is sourced. To spell the first source out quite simply (Yee, Encyclopedia of Race, Ethnicity and Society), it reads outright,
"[T]he term reverse racism (or reverse discrimination) has been coined to describe situations where typically advantaged people are relegated to inferior positions or denied social opportunities to benefit racial and ethnic minorities".
This is a source that has been used in this article in describing reverse racism's similar relationship to reverse discrimination, but strangely editors here insist that "reverse racism" is solely the concept referring to reverse-racism in examples of claimed "anti-white racism". It is clear that Yee's description is much more definitive, referring to the concept of "typically advantaged people", as opposed to just white people, outright, which is indeed where the term is more commonly used. I have quoted almost word-for-word of Yee's quote in my reverted first sentence.
Secondly, if there is emphasis on "anti-white racism" accusations in the first paragraph, that can only be improved by adding context. Again, it is clear that the term "anti-white racism" is linked - but not definitively so - with "reverse racism", and so the context I added was simply, "accusations thereof [of anti-white racism] seen in countries such as the United States and South Africa", which are mentioned extensively throughout the article.
Who here seriously believes that reverse-racism is fundamentally the concept that "affirmative action and similar color-conscious programs for redressing racial inequality are forms of anti-white racism."? Indeed this refers to the concept contextually, e.g., in the US and South Africa (which most sources write of), but their wording is never exactly as fundamental as Yee's definition. I am reverting my edit back as it is much clearer. Zilch-nada ( talk) 22:59, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
for example...because it is expanding on a more complicated point, and continues with
However...because it explains that scholars do not generally accept this as a starting premise. Decontextualizing a source in this way is not appropriate, but as NightHeron said, you will find very little appetite for re-litigating this yet again. Grayfell ( talk) 23:36, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
Belief in reverse racism is widespread in the United States. The beliefs of Americans, especially conservatives, are described in detail throughout the article, particularly under § Public attitudes. If published, reliable sources focus on the lack of empirical evidence, then so do we, whatever the " silent majority" may believe. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 04:44, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Yee is giving a very general overview of various conceptions of racism. We tend to rely on more in-depth sources such as Ansell and Garner, who each devote a section specifically to the idea of reverse racism.The argument that Yee is more
definitivehas been heard and rejected. One new point: a term coined to describe XYZ and one which describes XYZ have very different meanings; the latter statement implies more strongly that XYZ actually exists, which is misleading. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 04:07, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Plenty (most) of articles speaking of reverse racism in relation to anti-white racism do so in American contexts– Which sources describe reverse racism in any other context than the US & SA? — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 04:33, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
unduly limits the lead sentence. "Reverse racism" has been invoked in other countries besides the U.S. – not only South Africa as described in the article but also the UK; see Song (2014) ... and Australia; see Nelson et al. (2018) .— Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 05:02, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
very clear national contextto the topic, not suggesting a specific addition to the article. Once again, we need a published source to directly support any material added. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 05:52, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
seriously believesabout the topic is irrelevant; we go by published, reliable sources, not editors' beliefs, opinions, or experiences. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 04:15, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Reverse racism is a concept commonly associated with conservative opposition to affirmative action and other color-conscious victories of the civil rights movement in the United States and anti-racist movements abroad.We've been over this before. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 05:19, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
While traditional forms of racism involve prejudice and discrimination on the part of whites against blacks, reverse racism is alleged to be a new form of anti-white racism practiced by blacks and/or the so-called civil rights establishment. [2] — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 05:31, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
anti-white racism practiced by blacksrefers in part to
anti-racist movements abroad. The one is literally stated right after the other. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 06:04, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
in any and all contexts where white supremacy has diminished. White loss of privilege is experienced by some as at the expense of black gains, citing South Africa as the main example. [3] The connection between "anti-white racism" and "anti-racist movements abroad" (i.e. doing away with white supremacy) seems pretty clear. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 06:15, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
At its most general level, such [reverse racism] debate has come to bear in any and all contexts where white supremacy has diminished.[4] Seems pretty definitive to me. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 06:32, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
contexts of the reverse racism debatebesides places where white supremacy has diminished, what are they? — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 06:58, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
white loss of privilegeto show what happens
in any and all contexts where white supremacy has diminished, not just in one or two countries. Once again, what is meant by "white loss of privilege" if not perceived "anti-white racism"? — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 07:07, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
any and all contexts where white supremacy has diminishedis the only "example" Ansell gives of where the reverse racism "debate" has come to bear, I'd say it's not an example but a generalized description. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 07:27, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
the term reverse racism (or reverse discrimination) has been coined to describe situations where typically advantaged people are relegated to inferior positions or denied social opportunities to benefit racial and ethnic minorities, or, in some instances, women.[5] Why are we not talking about adding "women" to the definition in the lead sentence? Could it be that Yee's definition is intentionally broader than the specific topic of reverse racism in that it encompasses other forms of "reverse discrimination" as well? Not very "definitive" at all, is it? — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 15:19, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
in any and all contexts where white supremacy has diminished, we can infer that those are the most noteworthy contexts unless and until a different source says otherwise. You can say that's not "definitive", but so what? Wikipedia describes topics according to due weight, not whether they satisfy some arbitrary standard of definitiveness. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 12:30, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Reverse racism is a concept commonly associated with conservative opposition to affirmative action ... reverse racism is alleged to be a new form of anti-white racism. This directly supports the statement in the lead. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 15:51, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Just because something is the lead sentence of an article and has the form “[article title] is…”, that does not means that what follows is necessarily a definition. For example, Great replacement is an article that in some sense is similar to Reverse racism. Its first sentence, like that in Reverse racism, is not a definition of what the term in the title means, but rather is a description of what its importance is in the real world: “The Great replacement […] is a white nationalist far-right conspiracy theory…”
By the way, I hope you’ve noticed that most of the 7 editors besides you have argued against your edit, and none have supported it. Undoubtedly other editors are not inclined to enter the discussion because it deals with issues that have already been extensively discussed before, because there is near-zero likelihood that the consensus on these matters will be changed now, and because reading and responding to your WP:WALLOFTEXT is a time sink. Please read WP:DROPTHESTICK. NightHeron ( talk) 14:18, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
opened up, the procedure for doing so is described at WP:CONTENTDISPUTE. Knock yourself out. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 14:37, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
a mere three editors? What on earth are you talking about? I count 7 questioning your POV in this thread alone. And that is leaving aside previous discussions where this matter was already settled. Having one's views confirmed by consensus and continuing to edit in accordance with that consensus is in no way "holding onto the stick". That's absurd. You are of course free to post at a noticeboard, but you've certainly been afforded a heaping measure of AGF here so far. We are not, after all, required to WP:SATISFY you. Generalrelative ( talk) 21:24, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Reverse racism is a concept commonly associated with conservative opposition to affirmative action ... reverse racism is alleged to be a new form of anti-white racism, Bax (2018):
Many Americans—including some people of color—staunchly believe in the existence of reverse racism, or racism against whites, Feagin (2001, p. 250):
whites, especially white men, have recently claimed the status of victims of discrimination. Using oxymoronic terms like reverse discrimination, whites have successfully pushed aside the central issue of the systemic racism still routinely oppressing Americans of color, Garner (2017, p. 14):
terms such as 'reverse racism' (Box 9.4) gain currency [...] the increasingly frequent assertion that programmes ranging from affirmative action to multiculturalism in the public arena end up placing white people at a systematic disadvantage, McKinney (2005, p. xx):
The racism my white students seem most comfortable discussing is so-called 'reverse' racism. Many feel that they as whites are facing racial victimization, Roussell et al. (2019):
Reverse racism is the idea that the Civil Rights Movement not only ended the subordination of communities of color in all aspects of social life but also simultaneously led to a similar subordination of Whites.
Whites, in self-defense, responded with the term 'reverse racism' in the face of affirmative action, which brings to mind 'Crow Jim,' the expression that Whites used to describe discrimination against Whites during the era of Jim Crow, [3] Ian Hawkins & Muniba Saleem (2022):
Reverse racism is the perception that White individuals experience discrimination, prejudice, or group-based bias because of the color of their skin, [4] and Bongki Woo (2018):
reverse racism, a concept holding that whites believe they are discriminated against as much as or more than racial/ethnic minorities. [5]
sometimes difficult to confirm because its existence may be based on one's perception of an interaction or situation.[6] Compared to the more in-depth sources cited above, Yee's definition is the opposite of a
full descriptionsince it leaves out the entire context relating to conservative opposition to affirmative action, perception of anti-white bias, etc. Fixating on the presence or absence of
specific national contextsdilutes this more important context stated in multiple RSes. Yee's definition also includes
womenamong perceived victims of reverse racism/discrimination. Are we proposing to add that to the lead sentence as well? It seems that Yee is intentionally talking about other forms of "reverse discrimination" along with "reverse racism". — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 01:28, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
References
Yee 2008
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Ansell p135
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).This article alleges that non whites are inferior to whites? How is this considered an academic description? How am I inferior to whites? That is nazi ideology, I am just as valid as whites, and superiority of whites is an outdated belief. Shameful. 172.59.197.239 ( talk) 11:56, 17 January 2024 (UTC)