HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mps1@cec1.wustl.edu (Mihir Pramod Shah)
Subject: Re: RACISM
Organization: Washington University, St. Louis MO
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 01:08:43 GMT

Ron,
	Sorry about the "liberal trap" comment.  I should have said "Radical
Liberal".  From what I have seen, you seem to be a pragmatic liberal.  There
is a big difference between being a Far-L Wing liberal like Sister Souljah
and being a liberal with reasonable views.  Most liberals are decent people.
And yes, there are many white liberals.  But there is that small fringe group,
including radical white liberals, who believe minorities are the eternal
victim of racism and all whites should feel guilty for it.  VERY FEW people
think this way, but they are there.  Often the fringe groups exert more 
pressure than their numbers suggest.  The Far-Right conservative wing is
another example.

     About the rest of the world.  I guess I was thinking on a more diplomatic
plane, rather then a grass-roots level.  Your example of Yugoslavia was a very
good arguement against me.  I should have revised my comment.  Let's just
say that SOME parts of the world are VERY SLOWLY becoming enlightened about
racial and cultural tolerance.  It is my opinion that American society, while
having its racist sides, provides much hope in terms of racial concilliation
and harmony.  It is not a prime example, but it is the only major example.

	About whites and racism. Here is where I must disagree.  It is ALL of
our responsiblity to fight racism.  The white race is not the ones who have
to bear the burden.  The ball is not totally "in their court".  The reason I
say this is that, like any other race, every white person has different
opinions.  There are white liberals, white moderates, and white conservatives.
I myself am an Asian-American moderate (I hate to hyphenate, but have to in
this case for clarification).  I voted for Bill Clinton.  Much of what I like
about him is his bridge-building attitude on race.  He is not a radical
left-wing goon who believes in a white race guilt-trip.  Nor is he a radical
right-wing goon who believes it's all blacks or other races own responsibility
and racism doesn't exist, except in the form of so-called "reverse
discrimination."
	My own assessment of racism is this:  Most racism in this country
comes from "white sources".  Nevertheless, there is a growing and valid concern
over how the minorities are reacting.  I don't agree with the extreme "PC"
attitude that the whites alone must clean up their t.  If we are to succeed in
combatting racism, then people of ALL races must work TOGETHER.  There many
fine examples of whites and minorities who have pragmatically liberal to
pragmatically conservative views.  This also includes moderates and centrists.
Listen to Bill Clinton, Tony Brown, Clarence Page, Jack Kemp, Douglas Wilder,
William Weld, John Danforth.  These are proment people who have reasonable
and decent views.  They are not extremists at either end.  I keep saying the
same thing:  The think I hate most is not liberals or conservatives, but
EXTREMISM IN ANY SHAPE OR FORM, whether they be Ice Cube or David Duke.

Peace...Mihir



Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
From: tyadav@athena.mit.edu (Tapesh Yadav)
Subject: Re: Excluding men
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 00:51:17 GMT

===================================
 moh2@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>
>Hi guys.....here's something that's been disturbing me - tell me what
>you think.
> -[delete]-------
>At the moment, men are not allowed to read or post to the list...nor
>are we supposed to crosspost to newsgroups, although that's up for
>discussion.  What do you think?   This feels to me like
>discrimination, despite the practical reasons for doing so.  

 I think they have every right to exclude anybody from their 
 discussion group - even if the exclusion is based on fear - real
 or practical. It may not be productive however. Appears to me 
 that, they are to loose more than gain anything from such exclusion. 

 It would be discriminatory if:
  - men wanted to join the group (do they?)
  - had something worthwhile to contribute within 
    the charter of the group (do they?)
 and such men were refused admission. 

 Just because one can write/speak/read, it doesn't give one the right to
 share, participate and enjoy someone else's thoughts. 

 Think about this in a more extreme form. You, I and every individual
 has a right to privacy. Most, if not all, humans need a space that
 belongs exclusively to them. If that helps them be happier that 
 way, rest of humanity should leave them alone, and find other 
 forums/means to achieve the satisfaction denied thru exclusion. 
 Life ain't limited.

> - Amirthi (who gets a very uneasy feeling at *any* form of exclusion
>or separatism)

 Exclusion can be based on hatred and prejudice.
 Exclusion can also be based on the need for privacy / self definition.

 I feel uneasy/annoyed by former. But, the later is honorable/desirable.
 Which is the case here, this mind doesn't know?
 So lets give the benefit of doubt to the unknown, and leave it alone.

T.Y.
----
tyadav@athena.mit.edu
From: hira@cme.nist.gov (Ron Hira)
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
Subject: Re: RACISM
Date: 18 Nov 92 20:28:55 GMT
Reply-To: hira@cme.nist.gov
Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology

In article <1992Nov4.230848.15382@wuecl.wustl.edu>, mps1@cec1.wustl.edu (Mihir Pramod Shah) writes:
|> From: mps1@cec1.wustl.edu (Mihir Pramod Shah)

|> While I do agree that racism exist around the world, don't fall into the liberaltrap that so many American (I'm not sure about Canadian) minorites have fallen
|> into.  To broadly brand all whites as racist is racist itself.  How can you
|> tell if all whites are racist?  Yes, there are many whites who are racist, but
|> not most of them.  In fact, the third world is full of racism and
|> discrimination.  Just look at the communal fighting in India!  I don't mean to
|> bash India, as it is very much a part of my heritage and I am proud of that.
|> But in the U.S. there is a very big backlash to the "Politicall-Correct
|> Thought" movement that believes that dark-skinned people are omni-innocent and
|> whites are omni-guilty of racism and all the plundering of dark-skinned people.

I wouldn't consider it a *liberal* trap to say that all whites are racist.
Where you equate these two things I don't know. There are plenty of
white liberals also. I consider myself a *liberal*, but I certainly don't
view *all* whites as racists. After all my 2 sister-in-laws are both white
as well as plenty of good friends. 

However, having said that there are plenty of white people, if not *most*,
who are ignorant/complacent of/to the minority experience in America.
There are plenty of "dark-skined" people who could be called racist.
However, the people in power in America are white, plain and simple. 

|> Note that the British Empire is but a vestige of what it was before.  The world
|> is slowly realizing that we should all get along well, and the burden falls on
|> everybody, not just the "elite white" people of the world.

What world have you been living in??? It seems to me that nationalism and
racism is on the rise all over the world, e.g., Yugoslovia, USSR, India, USA,
etc. 

Until whites become more sensitive to the *large* amount of discrimination
in this country, there won't be any kind of racial harmony. Its a two
way street, but frankly the ball is in their court. The conservatives have
been able to take the teeth out of civil rights legislation, affirmative
action, etc. They've shown a complete disinterest in the urban poor, who
happen to be majority black (any coincidence). 

Ron
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
From: tyadav@athena.mit.edu (Tapesh Yadav)
Subject: Re: Your Duty as an IA/American
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 23:33:37 GMT

==============================
 hira@cme.nist.gov replies:
>What the heck is going on here??? Its somehow my fault that I get called a
>sand nigger??? 

 It may not be your fault that you are called names.
 But, IMO, it is your fault that you give a damn what someone calls you.
 By being angry, you are legitimizing the remark. Perhaps, even giving
 grounds for someone to repeat it.

>Its somehow my fault that I get stared at when I walk into
>a place with a white woman??? 

 I don't quite understand this. How come you have the desire/time to 
 find out who is staring at you? Enjoy the date. I am usually so lost
 with my date that I don't know/care who is around me.

 Furthermore, may be they are staring at you for positive reasons (and 
 not racism). Many humans are unsuccessful in dating/relationships. And 
 they may be tempted to learn your manners of courtship....

 If stares trouble you, take your date to places where there is NOBODY
 to stare, or perhaps places where people don't have time to stare. 
 
>It is a two way street, and some of the onus has to be put on minorities, 
>by way of mixing/educating white *and* african americans that we're just
>like them in many ways. But the media and white people also have to make
>some kind of concerted effort to understand us. 
>
>Ron

 Well, another option is to become productive, excellence seekers, 
 perfectionist like the Japanese. Remember, Japanese were, perhaps,
 the most ridiculed minority after WW II. And, not as many treat them
 like that. 

 Forget educating others about who you are.
 Educate yourself. Dream. Think. And enjoy your life.
 The world will adjust to you.

 Because you evolved unto a mind, heart and soul - enjoy what life
 has to offer. Stop worrying about what someone other than yourself
 thinks about you.

T.Y.
----
tyadav@athena.mit.edu
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Tuesday, 17 Nov 1992 11:27:40 CST
From: <U09354@uicvm.uic.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
Subject:    Re:Antarnaad

My reflections after seeing the movie:
The movie is thought-provoking although not entertaining.
The story is about two villages where the people are oppressed and there is lot
 of hatred between people of different caste as well as between individuals.
Three guys belonging to a movement called Swadhya, preach the principles of
Pandurang Sastri, the founder of Swadhya.
It revolves around the belief that God is within oneself.
By applying this belief in their daily life, people build up their self-esteem.
They also begin to think for themselves and act accordingly rather than simply
resigning to their fate.

Any Swadhyayis out there (or people who have seen the movie) would like to
add to what I've said....?

Bipin Raj                               Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
u09354@uicvm.cc.uic.edu                 University of Illinois at Chicago
From: hira@cme.nist.gov (Ron Hira)
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
Subject: Re: MISUNDERSTANDING
Date: 23 Nov 92 19:01:15 GMT
Reply-To: hira@cme.nist.gov
Distribution: usa
Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology

In article <1992Nov19.232750.18487@nas.nasa.gov>, raghavan@wk28.nas.nasa.gov (Venkatraman Raghavan) writes:
|> From: raghavan@wk28.nas.nasa.gov (Venkatraman Raghavan)
|> Subject: Re: MISUNDERSTANDING
|> Date: 19 Nov 92 23:27:50 GMT
|> 
|> Attribution:
|> 
|>  >   = Ron Hira
|>  >|> = Me flaming Ashish Vaidya:
|>        [ As we all know, I am allergic to the initials A.V. :-) 
|>          Just kidding, Alok. ]
|> 
|> [Ron, I have deleted the stuff on which both of us agree. Also  I didn't
|> expect to be scrutinized on my flaming of Ashish. His postings contained
|> a lot of hatred and I was just trying to let him know how he sounds.
|> Somehow, Ashish's stories sounded more like sour grapes to me. 
|> (Families driven out of their homes due to racism, etc.). Also
|> he never responds to the any questions asked. ]

I responded with a bit of fire, not because I agree with Mr. Vaidya, but
because most of the postings seemed to be carte blanche for the white
people in america to avoid changing their attitudes.

|>  >|> [Some of your hatred of America seems to come from the economic hardship
|>  >|> you might have gone through. Get a decent education and a good job, you 
|>  >|> will be happier. If you are trying to form Indian street gangs, no thanks,
|>  >|> we don't need them.]
|> 
|>  >What you're advocating is that we should feel good about ourselves
|>  >because the white man has sort of accepted us into their clique. 
|> 
|> I am not advocating that at all. Also, I am not saying that there
|> is no racism. All I was saying was that the best way out of a ghetto
|> is by moving up the economic ladder.

True enough, but we should not ignore those people at the bottom rung.
There is plenty of racism even in our socioeconomic class. We just 
tend to be a little more accepting of the subtle racism because we're
'comfortable.'

So many Indians blame blacks for their plight as being 'lazy', etc.
There appears to be little if at all any empathy for african 
americans who are discriminated against by almost all other groups. 

|>  >One thing that I've been wondering about is if anyone knows a good 
|>  >derogatory name for white people? Frankly, "whitey" doesn't cut it. 
|> 
|> I have used 'pale face' at some people, showing my support for the
|> other 'indians'.

I'll try that one. Thanks.

Ron
From: mba2@Rosie.UH.EDU (Puneet_S)
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
Subject: Re: SEX
Date: 23 Nov 1992 15:37:21 GMT
Organization: University of Houston
Reply-To: mba2@Rosie.UH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: rosie.uh.edu

.In article <1el01bINN45a@bigboote.WPI.EDU>, udumudi@vanilla (u v babu srinivas) writes:
>
>13. [unmarried] having sex with a neighbour's/friend's wife?  

PS.	Interesting... Guilt....maybe/maybe not.....
>
>14. [married] having sex with friend's/neighbour's wife?
>
PS	Guilt.... If I were married, severe guilt (as of right now)

>15. [married/unmarried] having sex with someone who you don't
>    know very well, but know that s/he is married?
>
PS	No guilt...., It's her/his marraige, not mine or my friends..

>
>16. with a distant relative, sex with whom is prohibited in your 
>    culture?

PS	No, couldn't do it....thought about it, but couldn't, wouldn't
	can't, won't, never......stay the course....thousands points
	of light......uh uh, no way....
>
>17. within a family?
>
PS	See above......
________________________________________________________________________________
It's not my goddamn planet, monkey boy
Puneet

                                                         MBA2@JETSON.UH.EDU   or
                                                         BBRC215@BAL0053.B-R.COM
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
From: baindur@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Satyen G Baindur)
Subject: Re: RACISM
Organization: HAC - Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 20:14:50 GMT


             ---------------------------------------------
             Posted for Susan Chacko (susanc@helix.nih.gov)   
             ---------------------------------------------

 
In article <1992Nov19.053701.8214@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu>, baindur@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Satyen G Baindur) writes...
>Second, in all the talk of racism, it seems to me the economic/class aspect 
>is very important. There was an article in the Washington Post on Monday 
>(did you see it, Ron ?) which talked about the problems Indian immigrants 
>face, and focused on the serious racial incidents in New Jersey.
>It brought out clearly how, in the early days of South Asian immigration 
>to the US, most of the immigrants, who were professionals (physicians, 
>engineers, etc) took jobs that white people did not want, and for which, 
>presumably there was little supply from minority communities - such as 
>staffing inner city hospitals. These immigrants faced little, if any hostility 
>from the white community. However, the second wave of 'sibling-immigration' 
>brought the shopkeepers, restaurant owners, cabdrivers, and laborers, who 
>actually impacted and displaced people in several economic sectors. For 
>example, there is an interview with a white store owner who said that 
>people did not want to shop at her store any more because there were some 
 
The 'first wave' of immigrants, who were the professionals, were also
much more distributed among the population. They tend(ed) to live in
suburban neighbourhoods and didn't form geographical or work groups.
(social groups, perhaps). But restaurant owners and shopkeepers tend
to group together in 'Indian' areas, and thus they're a much more
visible minority and easier to target in racial incidents. I've no
hard statistics to show whether this was a factor, but it seems
intuitively that it might be.
 
Susan.
From: mba2@Jane.UH.EDU (Puneet_S)
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
Subject: Re: what up
Date: 17 Nov 1992 16:12:54 GMT
Organization: University of Houston
Reply-To: mba2@Jane.UH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: jane.uh.edu

, Ashish Vaidya
><ICASV@ASUACAD.BITNET> wrote:
>
>Ashish, I've had the same question about you since your first post, and
>I've asked it twice and I'm asking it again, because I really want to know:
> What does it mean to you to identify yourself as a brahmin?  			
>	
>Please answer this posting, so I won't turn into a broken record.

Actually I had a few questions concerning the same matter.  I believe I 
pointed them out when Ash was talking about prejudicim.  I believe it was
when Ash made a comment about being a BRAHMIN and something about the
LOWER CASTES.  I did not get a response also.

Ash, if you missed those posts I know of a system that keeps posts for 2
weeks.  If you would like please let me know and I will have a friend mail
you the posts on this string.

________________________________________________________________________________
It's not my goddamn planet, monkey boy
Puneet

                                                         MBA2@JETSON.UH.EDU   or
                                                         BBRC215@BAL0053.B-R.COM
From: mba2@Rosie.UH.EDU (Puneet_S)
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
Subject: Re: SEX
Date: 21 Nov 1992 18:21:38 GMT
Organization: University of Houston
Reply-To: mba2@Rosie.UH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: rosie.uh.edu

>|> 4.	What is Sex?  Is sex the phyical act of fucking or the
>|> 	act of making love?  Is one right before marraige and
>|> 	the other not?
>
>I'm not going to try to define sex, fucking, or making love, but I will reiterate my
>
>|> 5.	Is there dishonor in sex before marraige?  Why?
>
>  My question here
>-- what IS honor?  Izzat?  Does it really matter?
>
PS.	I don't know anymore.... What is honor... Each group has there
	own.....Women who have had sex before marraige, are they dishonored..?

>What about engaging in pre-marital sex with someone who's not
>South Asian?  With someone who IS South Asian?  Is there a difference?  What if you are a virgin and
>your spouse isn't?  What do you feel about that?  Or visa versa?  What about
>extramarital sex?  How about widows and divorcees?

PS.	No worried, anyone from any culture is fine with me.  I feel	
	that it's dependent on you the individual....  
	Virgin issue - Don't care... Don't want person to be promiscuous
	in the sense of frequent/few/etc.. one night stans. 
________________________________________________________________________________
It's not my goddamn planet, monkey boy
Puneet

                                                         MBA2@JETSON.UH.EDU   or
                                                         BBRC215@BAL0053.B-R.COM
From: amit@canon.CS.Berkeley.EDU (Amit Gupta)
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
Subject: Re: Excluding men
Date: 23 Nov 1992 07:39:11 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: canon.cs.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Nov22.221117.7193@cbnewsi.cb.att.com>, alok@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (alok.vijayvargia) writes:
|> In article <19NOV199212534070@rosie.uh.edu>, fina2f@rosie.uh.edu (Venkatesh, P. C.) writes:
|> > Posted for Susan Chacko, please send email to susanc@helix.nih.gov
|> > The mailing list is private, and there's absolutely no need to 
|> > justify its policies.

 [ D E L E T E D] 

|> First, mailist list is NOT private but an Internet Mailing list.
|> So let's not hide behind this magic word 'private'.

I am afraid I dont understand what "Internet Mailing list" means. Does
this include *all* mailing lists on the Internet? Or, mailing lists that
have been advertised on the Usenet qualify for being "Internet Mailing list"?

I myself run 2 mailing lists; both are restricted to folks in Berkeley. 
I dont think I will ever justify the membership criteria to anyone.

Given that this list is moderated, it is kinda like everyone sending private
email to the moderator, who then forwards selected emails to some selected
folks. Are you saying that that is illegal?

|> Nobody has asked that the posts posted on the mailing list be posted on
|> other newsgroups which are open to others. What has been asked of the
|> moderators of this Internet mailist list is the following: Keep it OPEN
|> to participation by anyone who is willing to contribute on its chartered
|> issues. DO NOT decline membership to the Internet mailing list solely
|> on the basis of gender. That amounts to discrimination and I believe it
|> is illegal for any organization using public facilities like INTERNET.

I looked at Stephanie da Silva's posting about *public* Internet mailing 
lists. She says..

:Please note the following caveats: publication of a list here does not
:guarantee that you will be allowed to join as a member.  That is up to
:the moderator and readers, and they have the right to restrict access
:to their list as they see fit.  
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^(emphasis mine)


|> All I asked is a vote on it so that we know what percentage of women
|> think that male participation is not good for such a mailing list.
|> Such a vote could be conducted on the Mailing list itself. Pick up
|> a neutral vote taker. Shayamla Permeshwaran/Amirthi would be a good choice 
|> for the vote taker. 
|> > Susan
|> Alok


I am not sure whether you wanted to imply that Uma and Susan are not
"trust-worthy" as vote-takers. I would rather you dont.


-amit
Amit Gupta
amit@cs.Berkeley.EDU
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian