naive Wrote:Ok,  "racial prejudice or discrimination". Saying that most koreans love starcraft is a racial prejudice based on your limited experience, when in fact <50% of koreans have ever even played starcraft. Prejudice isn't always negative, whenever prejudices are based on race they are racism.

Prejudice: any preconceived opinion or feeling, either favorable or unfavorable.

Do I need to define preconceived for you too?

The first definition is probably the most applicable.

But going by the 2nd.

Racial prejudice is different than just prejudice. Taking one word out adds a different meaning. In this context racial prejudice correlates more to racial discrimination rather than the definition of prejudice.

Quote:The Oxford English Dictionary defines racism as the "belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races" and the expression of such prejudice,[9][10] while the Merriam-Webster's Dictionary defines it as a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority or inferiority of a particular racial group, and alternatively that it is also the prejudice based on such a belief.

The two definitions from these dictionary link racial prejudice to the part 1 of the definition. It's important not to take the words out of the context of the definition since it leads to a different definition. The way I read it, is that it's not an and statement but rather an also statement. While prejudice is a factor of racism, the simple presence of this does not insinuate racism. One must actively use the prejudice to discriminate, humiliate, etc... for the statement to be considered racist.

Poor logic/reasoning simply isn't enough for prejudice to be considered racist. You must use this prejudice for something else.

I don't think you could even apply racial discrimination to this situation. He wasn't discriminating against Koreans saying that they were the only one's allowed to play the game. So, it doesn't really speak for itself. Again, he just made a simple generalization that is accepted by others to be true. Generalization =/= Racism in this situation, since it, again, does not go to humiliate, degrade, etc.

I feel like we're going to have to agree to disagree, again. I do not believe that any further argument will be able to convince me that those statements were blatantly racist by Rival that you quoted. And I do not believe any of my arguments will be able to convince you. For my time, and yours, I feel like this is the best choice. (And for my sleep)

I do feel as if the definition and more importantly the legal definition as the US Courts at least treat it, are growing apart in difference. I do not agree with the recent growth of the usage of "That's racist", especially in many situations it really wasn't (IE on various college campuses, high school campuses, and work order). I feel as it's important to take a step back and realize that in some cases, it really isn't.

Just as an FYI: This isn't the thing I had a problem with, it was just like a meh for me, it's that first comment you made in part jest and part to prove your point about the Indian women. I find that pretty offensive not only to my homosexual friends that I converse with on a daily basis either at work or on campus, but to women.

We're also a bit off-topic off the thread, but then again it's the Flamez section anyway.

That and the fact that I'm flippin exhausted and it's 5'o clock in the morning.