It's not about what you say, but why you say it. I thought I was clear about this. If your reason for buying "black music" is because it's performed by black people and you want to help them out financially, then you are pursuing a racial motivation. If you call a form of music "black", but you buy it because you like it, then there is no problem.
Ok, although what you said is nonsense, I can agree to accept this. It's "nonsense" because no one classifies music as "black" because you want to financially help anyone out. It's called black music because that's what it is, black music.
Eminem was voted the number 1 rapper of the past decade. He's a white artist who does black music. I'm astonished that you thought otherwise.
I'm trying to avoid making a comment about your intelligence here. I really really am.
Read above... Your argument on labeling was reduced to "why?" That's absurd. It's either black music or it isn't. For the sake of this argument, I'll move onto the next argument as the contradiction in reference to your specific music quote seems to be "resolved"
I'm doing the same thing. I'm really trying to hold back the insults until you fire the first one, but it's becoming more and more difficult.
Nothing at all. Where it becomes "wrong" is when you buy it because you intend to benefit black people at the exclusion of other groups *because* they are black. Get it? Sheesh!
No need to respond to this as we already "resolved" the issue, just pointing out your inaccuracy. You are combining two totally different topics. Buying something in order to support a race has absolutely nothing to do with the actual label itself. Rather you are racially motivated to buy something or not, things will still have racial labels. My statement had nothing to do with racial motivations of support, but simply labels. Labels will exist regardless on your intent of purchase. My question was simply on the existence of the label, not why, how or when, just the existence of the label.
People don't change labels in order to support certain groups, because that's impractical and unrealistic. Black people aren't going to all of the sudden start listening to more country music and play in the NHL just because people started calling it "black".
But that doesn't actually have anything to do with the skin color of the people though, does it? A white chorus, in a white neighborhood, lead by a white minister, can chose to sing the same songs the same way as any "black church". If they like the style, they can. You're confusing cultural themes with race. A white kid who grows up attending said church would not specifically know that this was "black gospel music" unless someone (like you) deliberately told them "that's black music".
Errrrrr... it has all to do with the skin. There's a huge distinct difference between a black person's voice and a white person's voice. So, while it may be possible to imitate each other, talking and singing naturally will often result in two distinct sounds.
sigh... Because I know that the label refers to the type of food, not to the person cooking it, or the person profiting if I buy it.
I've explained this at least a dozen times now.
Not a **** thing. As I have repeatedly told you.
Nothing. Just as there's nothing wrong with referring to a type of food as "Chinese". As I have repeatedly told you.
That's my point. You claim that what bothers you is labels done only to segregate, yet you have no problem with these labels that do just that. I've given you alternatives, when heard, tells you exactly what type of food you're eating, yet, the unnecessary labels does not offend you. At the same time, it offends you when it's "black". Don't you see it's no different? Calling something "black" when there is no need to is no different than calling sushi "Japanese" or fried rice "Chinese".
What I said was that it's wrong to create or use a label for the sole purpose of benefiting one group over another. If your reason for labeling something "black music" is to identify a subset of musical styles so that others may know what you're talking about, there's nothing wrong with it at all. If your reason for calling something "black music" or "black films", or "black clothes", or "black stores", is so that black people will know that by buying those products or from that store, their money will benefit a person of their own race, then there *is* a problem with the creation and/or use of the label.
Well, this is already covered in this post, so I'm not going to waste too much time on this as I want to move on. The bottom line is that you're constantly confusing two completely different topics as one. This is why I keep asking you to answer my question and you give me answers with something totally unrelated. Your thinking process is totally off, but I can buy off on the result.
You specifically made a statement about choosing to buy from a "black store" so as to help out black people. What was the purpose of assigning the label of "black store" in that case? Was it to identify some set of products contained within? Or was it to identify the race of the person who owned it?
Read above. I actually find it ironic that you accuse me of "being all over the place", yet you're incapable of separating two topics.
I'm 99.9999999% positive your reason for that label was to identify the person who owned it. This is apparent since you were specifically speaking about "helping out" minorities. So that's not about a style of music, or a magazine line, or set of hair products. It's about helping out a person financially because of his skin color.
That's the form of labeling that is wrong.
And you'll be 99.9999999% wrong. There's a difference between a "black store" and a "black owned store". You are just so caught up in your own thinking that you refuse to accept the fact that you might just not know what you are talking about. Given that we're talking about an ethnicity that appears you know very little about, that should key you off that you might be wrong.
I'll say it again, because maybe if I repeat it enough times, you'll get it: It's not about what the label is. It's about why you labeled it that way, and how the label is used. If your reason for either creating the label or for using the label is to identify something which will benefit a given racial group in some way, then the motivation is racist in nature.
In the same way that saying that you only buy things with a union label on them, makes you pro-union. You aren't buying that product because of the quality, or the style, or the color. You're buying it because by doing so you support a union. But when you do the same thing with "black clothes", or "black music", or "black stores", what you are doing instead of just being dumb, is also racially discriminatory.
Ok, just to make sure that we are at a semi understanding to move on. You aren't contradicting yourself in reference to that specific question I asked you , you're just confused. You created this silly scenario that is not only irrelevant but doesn't happen. BUT, since you are no longer contradicting yourself, just making yourself look silly, we can move on with your approval.