Current Events > Black Lives Matter of Philadelphia has BANNED white people from their meetings

(+) Yeah! (+)

What about if you have a black eye
---

Stop comparing this to Jim Crow/Black codes.

There's a huge difference between only allowing people of a certain race to attend meetings geared towards that race and forbidding a certain race from doing things geared towards everyone.

Mal_Fet posted...

A Novel Idea posted...

blm bringing back segregation?? Segregation was imposed On communities by different levels of government. Blm won't make you drink from a different fountain

But they will section off whole areas and keep people of the wrong color out.

Totally different!

Yep lol. This is a meeting concerning black ppl and the black community and they've decided to limit it to the ppl concerned. This isn't something institutional like, again, separate drinking fountains

Like someone else said ITT, the ppl caterwauling about it would not attend these in the first place. So why complain?

I'm just smh at the typical suspects (aka white nerds) coming out the woodworks to say "this is segregation" "Martin Luther king would be disappointed."

ThanksUglyGod posted...

Stop comparing this to Jim Crow/Black codes.

There's a huge difference between only allowing people of a certain race to attend meetings geared towards that race and forbidding a certain race from doing things geared towards everyone.

Is racial discrimination and segregation a good thing? Yes or no
---

Mal_Fet posted...

ThanksUglyGod posted...

Stop comparing this to Jim Crow/Black codes.

There's a huge difference between only allowing people of a certain race to attend meetings geared towards that race and forbidding a certain race from doing things geared towards everyone.

Is racial discrimination and segregation a good thing? Yes or no

No

ThanksUglyGod posted...

Stop comparing this to Jim Crow/Black codes.

There's a huge difference between only allowing people of a certain race to attend meetings geared towards that race and forbidding a certain race from doing things geared towards everyone.

You'd feel like this wouldn't need to be pointed out, but here we are.
---

Obviously this isn't the same as a government enforced segregation, but the principal still stands that you shouldn't shun away your allies like this.

I'm Black and gay and i remember encountering attitudes like this at my school's LGBTA. My straight buddy would go with me as an ally. During one of the meetings the some said in group discussion that, " we all know that straight people, f****n suck, ...." and no one challenged that notion. Or folks discussed having it be a safe space for only queer people, and it turned my buddy and I off of the club.

While ethnicity and sexuality are not the same, i get frustrated when I see similar attitudes arise. Some people would like to help or simply gain understanding. If we don't let them come and learn then we're going to remain bitter / angry / violent in their eyes. The one that want to come to BLM meetings aren't the ones they need "protection" from.

I also volunteer actively with the Vietnamese community and I wouldn't be as much of an ally as I am now if they kept their efforts / meetings exclusive to Vietnamese people.

ThanksUglyGod posted...

Stop comparing this to Jim Crow/Black codes.

There's a huge difference between only allowing people of a certain race to attend meetings geared towards that race and forbidding a certain race from doing things geared towards everyone.

The left doesn't get to play this card. Yeah, this is not comparable at all to Jim Crow, but the left loves fucking butting into the lives of private citizens and business any time they percieve any discrimination, or even if there is no discrimination but racial representation is not to their liking.

If for whatever reason white people held some sort of meeting for white people only, the people defednig BLM on this would be the first ones to start crying racism.
---

DifferentialEquation posted...

If for whatever reason white people held some sort of meeting for white people only, the people defednig BLM on this would be the first ones to start crying racism.

Just curious, what would be discussed at these "white only" meetings? What problems plague the white community that are exclusive to the white community?
---

DifferentialEquation posted...

If for whatever reason white people held some sort of meeting for white people only, the people defednig BLM on this would be the first ones to start crying racism.

And you don't get to play the card of being upset about this as you've defended places being able to run their business privately and allowed to refuse service to whomever. By trying to make others look like a hypocrite you've revealed how massive of a one you are. Especially if you've ever talked about how "the black community needs to solve their own problems and stop relying on the government".


Anyway this is shit and does nothing to help no one. All this contributes to is more anger and dissent among the every day citizen.

Proof that BLM are a black supremiscist group? What else is new?
---

BigSLM1993 posted...

Obviously this isn't the same as a government enforced segregation, but the principal still stands that you shouldn't shun away your allies like this.

Oh I can understand that. I'm not 100% comfortable with this BLM chapter's decision either. I just understand where they're coming from.

There's this sentiment that people, oftentimes unintentionally, tend to hijack movements that aren't about them. This was just a way for black people to keep their autonomy in the decision making process.

Anyways, this is what I've been saying all along. This strain of identity politics divides people who should be aligned with each other. Its an inherent problem. Science march, women's march, BLM, OWS. All of them were ruined by it.
---

The Great Muta 22 posted...

DifferentialEquation posted...

If for whatever reason white people held some sort of meeting for white people only, the people defednig BLM on this would be the first ones to start crying racism.

And you don't get to play the card of being upset about this as you've defended places being able to run their business privately and allowed to refuse service to whomever. By trying to make others look like a hypocrite you've revealed how massive of a one you are. Especially if you've ever talked about how "the black community needs to solve their own problems and stop relying on the government".


Anyway this is shit and does nothing to help no one. All this contributes to is more anger and dissent among the every day citizen.

Where did I ever say that I want to stop BLM from doing this don't? I don't. Let them do it.

It's just ridiculous how people will call out any sort of percieved racism ("omg! That person dared to write a comic book that doesn't contain any minority heroes") but will jump through whatever hoops necessary to defend this.

Just because I don't personally agree with something doesn't mean I want something to be stopped. I don't want anyone to prevent BLM from holding meetings where they exclude white people.
---

ThanksUglyGod posted...

BigSLM1993 posted...

Obviously this isn't the same as a government enforced segregation, but the principal still stands that you shouldn't shun away your allies like this.

Oh I can understand that. I'm not 100% comfortable with this BLM chapter's decision either. I just understand where they're coming from.

There's this sentiment that people, oftentimes unintentionally, tend to hijack movements that aren't about them. This was just a way for black people to keep their autonomy in the decision making process.

This

As a black man I can totally see why they thought it would be nessacry from both cultural and personal experiences.

But a choice like that comes with a whole different set of problems.


If you're having a genuine discussion about black issues generally a non black ( especially white) person speaking on it does more harm then good.
---

DifferentialEquation posted...

Where did I ever say that I want to stop BLM from doing this don't? I don't. Let them do it.

So you have no problem with discrimination then, only when it's against "your side". That's pathetic.

ThanksUglyGod posted...

BigSLM1993 posted...

Obviously this isn't the same as a government enforced segregation, but the principal still stands that you shouldn't shun away your allies like this.

Oh I can understand that. I'm not 100% comfortable with this BLM chapter's decision either. I just understand where they're coming from.

There's this sentiment that people, oftentimes unintentionally, tend to hijack movements that aren't about them. This was just a way for black people to keep their autonomy in the decision making process.

But maintaining this autonomy is coming a cost. I think they have valid reasons to feel this way, these feelings aren't new (hence why they keep on bringing up Malcolm X). Even though Malcolm X changed most of his views before he died.

Like there's this quote he had before dying,

"Brother, remember the time that white college girl came into the restaurant, the one who wanted to help the [Black] Muslims and the whites get together and I told her there wasn't a ghost of a chance and she went away crying? Well, I've lived to regret that incident. In many parts of the African continent I saw white students helping black people. Something like this kills a lot of argument. I did many things as a [Black] Muslim that I'm sorry for now. I was a zombie then like all [Black] MuslimsI was hypnotized, pointed in a certain direction and told to march. Well, I guess a man's entitled to make a fool of himself if he's ready to pay the cost. It cost me 12 years."

what a joke
---

Mal_Fet posted...

But they will section off whole areas and keep people of the wrong color out.

Totally different!

but it literally is different, since they haven't sectioned off 'whole areas' as you say, or any public space whatsoever, and they don't have the power to enforce actual segregation that alienates the lawfully protected rights of white people

what benefit is gained by misrepresenting this rather than contesting the realistic potential cons?
---

The Great Muta 22 posted...

DifferentialEquation posted...

Where did I ever say that I want to stop BLM from doing this don't? I don't. Let them do it.

So you have no problem with discrimination then, only when it's against "your side". That's pathetic.

I don't like it when anyone does it. But when white people discriminate no one tries to morally excuse it. When minorities discriminate against white people then leftists try to come up with every excuse in the book why it's different and should be considered acceptable.
---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13OoNe51Vx8

DifferentialEquation posted...

But when white people discriminate no one tries to morally excuse it.

Except when you're a business refusing service to people, right? Like perhaps a Christian bakery? Or a gun range refusing Muslims?

Come on man, don't be dense. This shit happens ALL the time and people on every side defend it. You're not revealing some big hypocrisy.

tbh they probably just said that to stir up controversy so they can be on the news again
---

Isn't the point of BLM to make non-blacks realize that black lives matter too?

How do they plan to get through to "whites" if they're not going to listen to them to see what and why they believe what they do, if they're just going to alienate them and create divisive policies, etc

A Novel Idea posted...

. This is a meeting concerning black ppl and the black community and they've decided to limit it to the ppl concerned.

So is the message too directed at blacks? Did they finally move to a more pressing concern like gang violence instead of police?
---

prettyprincess posted...

what benefit is gained by misrepresenting this

he does it to discredit an organization / group of people
---

DifferentialEquation posted...

But when white people discriminate no one tries to morally excuse it.

That's because white people don't typically do shit like this in the interest of protecting their own community, and in the cases where they do, you get shit like Stormfront.
---

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

DifferentialEquation posted...

But when white people discriminate no one tries to morally excuse it.

That's because white people don't typically do shit like this in the interest of protecting their own community

Sure they do.
http://www.boydsecurity.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/iStock_000003147050Small-resized.jpg

The Great Muta 22 posted...

DifferentialEquation posted...

But when white people discriminate no one tries to morally excuse it.

Except when you're a business refusing service to people, right? Like perhaps a Christian bakery? Or a gun range refusing Muslims?

Come on man, don't be dense. This shit happens ALL the time and people on every side defend it. You're not revealing some big hypocrisy.

You mean both cases that resulted in appropriate responses such as lawsuits?

Public exclusion of white people has been happening all over the US at events and college meetings more and more these past few years. Sure, a lawsuit isn't possible--but these don't get the same condemnation at all and any white person to complain is met with deflections such as your post or a general "take a seat and fall in line."

You know that theory about how radicalized Muslims are brought about from anti-Muslim behavior and media? The same can be applied here--this is what makes white nationalism grow.
---

Questionmarktarius posted...

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

DifferentialEquation posted...

But when white people discriminate no one tries to morally excuse it.

That's because white people don't typically do shit like this in the interest of protecting their own community

Sure they do.
http://www.boydsecurity.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/iStock_000003147050Small-resized.jpg

Yeah, that "whites only" sign in the front there is ridiculous
---

Also, reading the OP again, even the article itself says that it's a "black only space" not that they've "banned white people".


Those are two hugely different things.
---

The Great Muta 22 posted...

Except when you're a business refusing service to people, right? Like perhaps a Christian bakery? Or a gun range refusing Muslims?

I don't morally approve of those types of things. I think those people are assholes, or at the very least, extremely stupid for alienating potential customers.

However, that's a separate issue from whether or not you think people should actually be prevented from doing this.

All I'm saying is that when white people blatantly try to exclude minorities, the left correctly points out that they're being assholes. When minorities are discriminating against white people, they come up with whatever excuse they can to morally justify it.
---

GOOMFalse posted...

Questionmarktarius posted...

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

DifferentialEquation posted...

But when white people discriminate no one tries to morally excuse it.

That's because white people don't typically do shit like this in the interest of protecting their own community

Sure they do.
http://www.boydsecurity.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/iStock_000003147050Small-resized.jpg

Yeah, that "whites only" sign in the front there is ridiculous

Outside of the deep south, the "white community" really is pretty much the local subdivision and HOA.

"Hey, there are structures in society that tend to make us feel like our voices aren't heard because we're black. How about inviting only black people so we can make sure that we are heard?"

"They want a racial divide"
---

Anarchy_Juiblex posted...

Isn't the point of BLM to make non-blacks realize that black lives matter too?

How do they plan to get through to "whites" if they're not going to listen to them to see what and why they believe what they do, if they're just going to alienate them and create divisive policies, etc

A Novel Idea posted...

. This is a meeting concerning black ppl and the black community and they've decided to limit it to the ppl concerned.

So is the message too directed at blacks? Did they finally move to a more pressing concern like gang violence instead of police?

No im sure they're listening to white allies, just not in their meetings.

Cause i'll tell you exactly what happens in meetings like that with white people.

It'll be 3 or 4 white people and at least one of them will voice an opinion on the subject that they've never experienced so the group then spends longer than normal explaining insider things that explain why said opinion is flawed.

Then the meetings over and every black person who wanted to speak wasn't comfortable enough to speak of just didn't have the time to.
---

scar the 1 posted...

"Hey, there are structures in society that tend to make us feel like our voices aren't heard because we're black. How about inviting only black people so we can make sure that we are heard?"

"They want a racial divide"

They are literally dividing people by race
---

Mal_Fet posted...

scar the 1 posted...

"Hey, there are structures in society that tend to make us feel like our voices aren't heard because we're black. How about inviting only black people so we can make sure that we are heard?"

"They want a racial divide"

They are literally dividing people by race

Are you purposely being dense or did you completely missed the point
---

So is nobody going to address the fact that they didn't ban whites exclusively and specifically said it's a "black only space" therefore making this entire topic stupid?
---

Mal_Fet posted...

scar the 1 posted...

"Hey, there are structures in society that tend to make us feel like our voices aren't heard because we're black. How about inviting only black people so we can make sure that we are heard?"

"They want a racial divide"

They are literally dividing people by race

And I literally explained the context.
---

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divide_and_rule
---

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

So is nobody going to address the fact that they didn't ban whites exclusively and specifically said it's a "black only space" therefore making this entire topic stupid?

Omg theyre banning asians too!
---

I am honestly worried that with the current political climate, parts of BLM getting more and more extreme, and other racist groups getting more confident, that we are going to have a civil war..

This is becoming more and more concerning to me...
---

gamepimp12 posted...

Mal_Fet posted...

scar the 1 posted...

"Hey, there are structures in society that tend to make us feel like our voices aren't heard because we're black. How about inviting only black people so we can make sure that we are heard?"

"They want a racial divide"

They are literally dividing people by race

Are you purposely being dense or did you completely missed the point

His point is dumb because it assumes that black people can't get there voices heard if white people are merely present at a rally.

As if white people are living, breathing noise-cancellers of anyone with too much melanin ion their skin.
---

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

So is nobody going to address the fact that they didn't ban whites exclusively and specifically said it's a "black only space" therefore making this entire topic stupid?

That isn't a GOOD thing

They are SPECIFICALLY SEPARATING THEMSELVES FROM ALL OTHER RACES, THIS IS NOT A "GOOD" THING!!
---

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

So is nobody going to address the fact that they didn't ban whites exclusively and specifically said it's a "black only space" therefore making this entire topic stupid?

Imagine thinking that's a significant difference.

Yes, they may be including no Asians, but so did the "white only" establishments. You're arguing a minor detail that doesn't make it less abhorrent.
---

DifferentialEquation posted...

However, that's a separate issue from whether or not you think people should actually be prevented from doing this.

All I'm saying is that when white people blatantly try to exclude minorities, the left correctly points out that they're being assholes. When minorities are discriminating against white people, they come up with whatever excuse they can to morally justify it.

If anything, this being something that isn't a business actually gives it more of a legal standing to be allowed. Where as a business refusing is both legally discriminatory and being an asshole.

And my point is the same damn thing happens with the right. To act like it doesn't, or it is some big different thing, is intellectually dishonest at best.

kinda amusing when the biggest complainers are also the biggest examples of why.
---

I HATE breitbart, but this is actually a big deal.

All it does is prove that at least the philly branch of BLM are completely racist.
---

gamepimp12 posted...

Anarchy_Juiblex posted...

Isn't the point of BLM to make non-blacks realize that black lives matter too?

How do they plan to get through to "whites" if they're not going to listen to them to see what and why they believe what they do, if they're just going to alienate them and create divisive policies, etc

A Novel Idea posted...

. This is a meeting concerning black ppl and the black community and they've decided to limit it to the ppl concerned.

So is the message too directed at blacks? Did they finally move to a more pressing concern like gang violence instead of police?

No im sure they're listening to white allies, just not in their meetings.

Cause i'll tell you exactly what happens in meetings like that with white people.

It'll be 3 or 4 white people and at least one of them will voice an opinion on the subject that they've never experienced so the group then spends longer than normal explaining insider things that explain why said opinion is flawed.

Then the meetings over and every black person who wanted to speak wasn't comfortable enough to speak of just didn't have the time to.

I can see the risk you speak of, but I haven't experienced it myself. Though this comes from my experience being one of the few Blacks in a Vietnamese Club (I eventaully became president at my college) and later joining staff of a Vietnamese non-profit, my presence did not make other's afraid to speak. Or when I had questions, the staff didn't seem bothered by me.

Or when there were heterosexuals at the LGBTA I didn't feel their questions hindered me or made me afraid to speak.

I understand that Black and White relations are unique to our history. But I feel there is always similar sentiments within Minority groups (ethnic, sexual, etc) to want to remain exclusive to itself or if they should let in members from other groups. And I can honestly say with the Vietnamese Community, if they had made moves to keep more exclusive they would have lost out on many allies. So I apply how it feels being the minority in another community I care for to how I approach other racial allies in the Black community.

But I'm guessing that you have experience with your point. So I think you have a valid point.

Anarchy_Juiblex posted...

Imagine thinking that's a significant difference.

It is a significant difference. The entire article and this entire topic is framed as "BLM DISCRIMINATES AGAINST WHITES" when they're moreso trying to get exclusively black voices, presumably to prevent from all of the deflection, defensiveness and derailment that comes when you have people coming in to discuss a topic that they're unfamiliar with.

But of course, the alt-right once again sees BLM do something without even mentioning whites individually, they make it exclusively about whites and then wonder why they do shit like this in the first place.


Anarchy_Juiblex posted...

Yes, they may be including no Asians, but so did the "white only" establishments.

Are you still trying to compare this to Jim Crow? Lmao
---

If it's a private club somehow, then there's every right to exclude anyone for any reason.