Black/Non-White Institutional Racism

Summaries and links to news items
Benjamin Bice
Posts: 1278
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 2:09 am

Re: Black/Non-White Institutional Racism

Post by Benjamin Bice » Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:37 am

University Of Kentucky Segregated Residential Assistance Training By Race, Sent White People To ‘White Accountability Space’

By Ashe Schow

Oct 10, 2020


Whites and non-whites training to be Residential Assistants at the University of Kentucky were segregated according to their race and put through different presentations.

The separate trainings were provided to Young America’s Foundation through the organization’s Campus Bias Tip Line, which included emails and documents about the training. White RAs were sent to a “White Accountability Space” where they were given a document that listed 41 “common racist behaviors and attitudes of white people.”

Number one on the list states that white people “believe they have ‘earned’ what they have, rather than acknowledge the extensive white privilege and unearned advantages they receive” and “believe that if people of color just worked harder …” The list also includes claims that white people don’t “notice the daily indignities that people of color experience; deny them and rationalize them away with PLEs (perfectly logical explanations),” “resent taking direction from a person of color,” and tend to ask “people of color to repeat what they have said.”

Brandon Colbert from the university’s Bias Incident Support Services offered a presentation for the training allegedly talking about “microaggressions and microinvalidations in the workplace and the harm that they cause.”

As YAF’s Kara Zupkus reported, Colbert’s previous tweets have “denounced the American Flag, National Anthem, and Independence Day all as being the stuff that makes [America] racist.”

The person who alerted YAF to the segregation wished to remain anonymous and said that white students were required to have the document on their computers and then discuss with which behaviors they were familiar.

“We talked about how we could best support our minority colleagues and be more mindful of the microaggressions we commit against them every day by being white,” the student told YAF. “They wanted us to acknowledge our ‘extensive white privilege.’”

The University of Kentucky did not defend or explain the training session when responding to YAF.

“Our RAs trained by zoom together and also in break-out sessions around particular topics of interest,” said university spokesman Jay Blaton. “Further, a number of our students – and others in our campus community – have approached our counseling center about resources that can be provided to help on issues related to racial reconciliation.”

YA’s University of Kentucky chapter president Parker Bowman gave a statement to Zupkus as well.

“This action by the university to segregate RA training is abhorrent,” Bowman said. “For a campus that prides itself on diversity, this is taking a step in the wrong direction. We should be talking to each other, not separating ourselves based on immutable characteristics.”

Further, as Zupkus reported, the University of Kentucky previously tried to block students from starting a YAF chapter on campus.

YAF’s Spencer Brown reported in August 2019 that students attempted six times to secure official recognition for a YAF chapter at the University of Kentucky. Internal communications between university staff revealed a personal bias against conservative ideas and YAF. At times, they mocked the students who were trying to find out why their organization was denied official recognition. “i didnt do it intetionally promise hehe,” wrote Caitlyn Walsh, the university’s Assistant Director of Student Organizations. ... g0LHQJ_mR0
Professor of Anti-White Discrimination and Racial Hypocrisy

Benjamin Bice
Posts: 1278
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 2:09 am

Re: Black/Non-White Institutional Racism

Post by Benjamin Bice » Sun Nov 01, 2020 5:56 pm

San Francisco Votes To Allow People To Sue if Someone Makes a 'Racist' 911 Call Against Them

By Jennifer Jean Miller
Published October 25, 2020 at 1:17pm

A proposed law intending to prevent 911 calls perceived as “racist” has stirred up opposition from individuals who feel its acronym may fan the flames of stereotypes against the callers.

The Caution Against Racial and Exploitative Non-Emergencies (or CAREN) Act, which passed unanimously during its first reading Tuesday at the San Francisco Board of Supervisors meeting, would make 911 calls with perceived racial undertones illegal, permitting those targeted by such calls to sue.

However, critics say the measure’s connotations regarding the name “Karen” could further false stereotypes surrounding white people, especially women named Karen, who call 911.

“The ordinance’s name is a twist on ‘Karen,’ the name social media gives people making racially biased 911 calls,” CNN reported. “And it’s not just ‘Karen.’ There are also names like ‘Becky,’ which has also come to symbolize a stereotype of whiteness. And ‘Susan.’ And ‘Chad.'”

“Today the Board of Supervisors unanimously passed the Caution Against Racial and Exploitative Non-Emergencies Act, aka CAREN Act, on first reading (1 more reading next week),” tweeted city Supervisor Shamann Walton, who introduced the legislation in July.

Walton added: “911 calls, are not customer service for people’s racism.”

The day the measure was introduced, co-author Matt Haney tweeted, “The CAREN Act makes it unlawful to fabricate false racially biased emergency reports. Racist false reports put people in danger and waste resources.”

CNN reported Walton’s and Haney’s proposal is similar to Assembly Bill 1550, a statewide measure introduced by Democratic Assemblyman Rob Bonta of California’s 18th Assembly District.

Bonta tweeted in July that together, the two bills are a “two-prong strategy to join forces and stop discriminatory 911 calls.”

“Using 911 as a tool for your prejudice towards marginalized communities is unjust and wrong!” Bonta said.

RELATED: Big Tech CEO Emails All 10 Million Customers Warning a Vote for Trump Is a 'Vote Against Democracy'

In a June news release, Bonta’s office claimed the bill’s aim was not to deter legitimate use of the 911 system.

“The intent of AB 1550 is not to discourage individuals who are facing real danger or who seek to report a crime in good faith from calling 911,” the release said. “Instead, this bill could protect millions of Californians from becoming targets of hate and prevent the weaponization of our law enforcement against communities of color.”

The Hill reported that under Walton and Haney’s proposed law, “a person can sue a 911 caller if the call made the person feel harassed, damaged their reputation or business prospects or forced them from an area where they had the right to be.

“Aside from racial discrimination, a person could also be targeted due to their sex, age, religion, disability, gender identity, weight or height,” according to The Hill.

“Multiple instances of white people calling 911 on people of color have gone viral this year, with the name ‘Karen’ now used to describe white women who use police to target members of other races,” the outlet added.

“These instances come amid protests against systemic racism and police brutality inflamed by the police killings of Black Americans including George Floyd, Breonna Taylor and Rayshard Brooks.”

CNN, meanwhile, pointed to its story about a white North Carolina Hampton Inn employee who called police on a black family to report a trespassing after spotting the children swimming alone in the hotel pool, as the mother reportedly charged her cell phone in her car.

The mother recorded her dealings with police on Facebook Live, reportedly declining to provide them her name and room number when asked and instead flashing her hotel key card.

The woman told CNN that the employee did not question other individuals who had been using the pool.

Following the incident, Hampton by Hilton tweeted an apology, stating the employee no longer worked for the company.

CNN also mentioned a story from May that occurred in the Ramble section of New York’s Central Park. The incident involved a black man said to be bird-watching who confronted a woman for walking her dog without a leash.

The dispute intensified after he began recording her on Facebook Live, refusing to stop when she asked him. On video, she told him she would call 911 and “tell them there’s an African-American man threatening my life.”

The woman, Amy Cooper, was terminated from her job following the viral confrontation and later charged with falsely reporting an incident in the third degree.

Not everyone supports the Board of Supervisors’ proposed bill.

“The name of the act places a target on my name as a racist and I am not,” a white woman named Caren wrote in a letter to the board. “By associating the name ‘Caren’ or anyone else’s name with such a law, really is offensive.”

“I do not have objection to this act; the issue it is trying to address is wrong,” another dissenter said. “I do strongly object to the … name. The insensitive choice of many people to use the name Karen as a general purpose term of disapproval for middle age white women needs to stop.”

The dissenter added that the acronym “has a significant negative impact on too many good women with this name.”

Others tweeted their dissatisfaction with Walton and Haney’s bill in July.

Similar legislation has been proposed or enacted in Los Angeles, Oregon and New York.

CNN reported the board will take its second vote on the bill in the coming week, and if it passes, Democratic Mayor London Breed can decide whether or not to sign it into law. ... wXxG6xA-CU
Professor of Anti-White Discrimination and Racial Hypocrisy

Post Reply