# Will we ever be fully integrated?



## JosephM (Dec 17, 2008)

I dine every few months at restaurants at two five-star hotels in Dallas, The Mansion on Turtle Creek and the Ritz-Carlton. _Never_ do I see a black face among the fellow diners.

I also read the society pages of the Dallas _Morning News_ on a regular basis. In pictures covering upscale events, you may see _a_ black face every six months or so.

So, I ask, rather than an implicit segregation, does it appear to be that there are still subtle methods in place which prevent Afro-Americans from being comfortable (and therefore present) at certain places and events?

If that is in fact going on, would you term that a form of social segregation?

JM


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

JM,

I have been to Fearing's many times and have seen many African American patrons and the fact that you never see any when you go there six times a year is hardly conclusive evidence.

Does informal segregation exist? Sure it does. But why not be a trailblazer in Dallas and invite one of your African American friends to join you next time you dine out at the Ritz or Mansion. Funny you had not thought of that before if you were so troubled by your experience. Better to be proactive, don't you think?

Karl


----------



## JosephM (Dec 17, 2008)

Karl89 said:


> JM,
> 
> I have been to Fearing's many times and have seen many African American patrons and the fact that you never see any when you go there six times a year is hardly conclusive evidence.


Thank you for the opportunity to be more precise. I ought to have stated I never see any black diners in The Gallery, the nicest of the four dining areas that comprise Fearing's. By my observation, The Gallery is where the nicer dressed and "more select" diners are seated.



> Does informal segregation exist? Sure it does. But why not be a trailblazer in Dallas and invite one of your African American friends to join you next time you dine out at the Ritz or Mansion. Funny you had not thought of that before if you were so troubled by your experience. Better to be proactive, don't you think?
> 
> Karl


Now you have opened up a Pandora's box! _All_ my close friends are caucasian. Perhaps I am a product of my environment, or perhaps I am merely a symptom of the issue I presented in my OP. More importantly, perhaps I am not all that "troubled" by it, as you inferred from my first post...

JM


----------



## SlowE30 (Mar 18, 2008)

In general, people will always be more comfortable with people like themselves, whether by skin color, political leanings, economic situation, culture, beliefs, language, manners, coolness, DRESS, interests, history, etc. Even suburban white kids divide themselves into jocks, goths, hipsters, etc. As skin color ceases to be a way to categorize others, new ways have become more prevalent. I think the new "segregation", mistaken by many to be racism, is by socioeconomic status and cultural values.

To answer your question, since you seem to deem "certain people being uncomfortable in certain surroundings" to be (racist?) segregation, no, "segregation" will never end until we are all robots, exactly the same.

As a counterpoint to your hypergeneralized example, my Zambian friend and I (white guy) were denied entrance to a "black" night club not long ago. Neither of us were "black" enough - as defined not by the color of our skin, but the fact that we didn't adhere to the gangster/ rap culture archetype. Is that evidence of racial segregation or segregation by percieved cultural values?

edit: your second post describes your example in more detail, but I still think it's a potentially damaging stretch to suspect or accuse subtle "segregation" in that case.


----------



## radix023 (May 3, 2007)

Living in Atlanta, I see integration at work, at lunch and on public transport all the time. But I see segregation every Sunday.


----------



## JosephM (Dec 17, 2008)

SlowE30 said:


> As a counterpoint to your hypergeneralized example, my Zambian friend and I (white guy) were denied entrance to a "black" night club not long ago. Neither of us were "black" enough - as defined not by the color of our skin, but the fact that we didn't adhere to the gangster/ rap culture archetype. Is that evidence of racial segregation or segregation by percieved cultural values?


I would say #2, SlowE30. If I'm reading your post correctly, it sounds like it was determined that you and your friend could not be a part of their community, based upon their unilateral criteria.

JM


----------



## TMMKC (Aug 2, 2007)

radix023 said:


> Living in Atlanta, I see integration at work, at lunch and on public transport all the time. But I see segregation every Sunday.


I think we, as a society, worry too much about integration. I do not support segregation at all, and feel every person has the right to do and go where he/she damn-well pleases (as long as they're not breaking the law, etc.).

We're a society of tribes (gender, ethnic, economic, etc.) and sometimes a tribe needs to keep to itself...and not be chastised for doing so.


----------



## Quay (Mar 29, 2008)

I was a regular at The Mansion in the 80's and early 90's when Dean Fearing was still there and making his incredible signature dishes like the warm lobster taco. During those times, there was usually a good mix of people from all over the world. (I look forward to trying out Fearing's soon.)

That being said, my experience of Dallas was that it is still, as Karl89 suggests, an informally segregated place in many ways. For instance, most in Highland Park and University Park (to a lesser extent) don't even know South Dallas exists, much less have even been there. And don't forget that the best-selling book for many years at Elliot's Hardware (one of my favorite places in the world) was a little book called _How To Speak Spanish to Your Help_. 

As Karl89 said again, it is probably very good to be proactive. A better society for all comes down to the actions of individuals in it, so why not start with you? :icon_smile:


----------



## JosephM (Dec 17, 2008)

Quay said:


> I was a regular at The Mansion in the 80's and early 90's when Dean Fearing was still there and making his incredible signature dishes like the warm lobster taco. During those times, there was usually a good mix of people from all over the world. (I look forward to trying out Fearing's soon.)


I don't think you would recognize what The Mansion has evolved into if you went back today. No lobster tacos, no dress code for "The Main Restaurant." Fearing's is better, but a little on the flashy side for my tastes.



> That being said, my experience of Dallas was that it is still, as Karl89 suggests, an informally segregated place in many ways. For instance, most in Highland Park and University Park (to a lesser extent) don't even know South Dallas exists, much less have even been there. And don't forget that the best-selling book for many years at Elliot's Hardware (one of my favorite places in the world) was a little book called _How To Speak Spanish to Your Help_.
> 
> As Karl89 said again, it is probably very good to be proactive. A better society for all comes down to the actions of individuals in it, so why not start with you? :icon_smile:


As I posted above (#3 in this thread), after due reflection, I'm not entirely convinced that I want to do anything proactive about this situation, even if I could.

JM


----------



## rlp271 (Feb 12, 2009)

SlowE30 said:


> I think the new "segregation", mistaken by many to be racism, is by socioeconomic status and cultural values.


I think a lot of cultural studies people would take that as being too naive. Race, class, and cultural values are things that are all linked, because of what goes into making up someone's identity. All of that influences the way the world interacts with you, and can have an adverse affect on your ability to move throughout society. So being black could mean that you're viewed as being lower class, because the lower class is almost never depicted as being white (although there are plenty of poor whites), which would lead to you being barred from certain social events.



> We're a society of tribes (gender, ethnic, economic, etc.) and sometimes a tribe needs to keep to itself...and not be chastised for doing so.


While this is true, it's also an argument to keep people separate for reasons that just don't hold water. I'm an adoptee, and I know another Koren adoptee (raised by 4th generation Norweigan parents) who was dating a white girl in the Minneapolis suburbs. They were neighbors for their entire lives, and one day, her father came to him and said, "I don't think you two should date, because you're just too different." When pressed for an answer, he said no more than, "Look, you two are just different. Let's leave it at that." Now, I'll admit that white people tend to be demonized the most, but that comes with being the majority. So, to answer the OP, yes, segregation and racism are a highly socialized and internalized parts of our society. That goes for all races, not just whites.


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

You know what they say about leading a horse to water.

Honestly, though, this is such a silly thread. You don't see enough black people at some high-class restaurant, and _that_ bothers you? Go hang out in the inner city sometime.


----------



## JosephM (Dec 17, 2008)

rlp271 said:


> So being black could mean that you're viewed as being lower class, because the lower class is almost never depicted as being white (although there are plenty of poor whites)


 [Emphasis added by me]

Not so, my friend. The film _Deliverance_? The TV Series "Roseanne," and "Married: With Children?"

JM


----------



## JosephM (Dec 17, 2008)

PedanticTurkey said:


> You know what they say about leading a horse to water.
> 
> Honestly, though, this is such a silly thread. You don't see enough black people at some high-class restaurant, and _that_ bothers you? Go hang out in the inner city sometime.


As I've already posted in this thread, I'm not so sure it _does_ really bother me, but thank you for taking the time to post your input.

https://askandyaboutclothes.com/community/showpost.php?p=925412&postcount=3

JM


----------



## ChicagoMediaMan-27 (Feb 23, 2008)

PedanticTurkey said:


> Honestly, though, this is such a silly thread. You don't see enough black people at some high-class restaurant, and _that_ bothers you? Go hang out in the inner city sometime.


I agree. I've never been to the Dallas area (or to Texas for that matter), but I see black people eating at upscale restaurants all the time in the city of Chicago.


----------



## rlp271 (Feb 12, 2009)

JosephM said:


> [Emphasis added by me]
> 
> Not so, my friend. The film _Deliverance_? The TV Series "Roseanne," and "Married: With Children?"
> 
> JM


Deliverance, ok, but Rosanne and Married: With Children, they may be working class, but that hardly makes them completely lower class. Also, it has seemed for quite some time, that it's more entertainment, and less cultural analysis, to make fun of poor white people. You can go farther back than that, Mama's Family, even Green Acres (think all the townspeople), etc. I'm thinking in more of a broad cultural collective. At most major universities when you study the poor, you almost always must study race as well, you are looking at black and hispanics. There's rarely a mention of poor whites. You're also bringing up examples from a time when it was difficult (not impossible: Fresh Prince etc., but you could never make fun of their lack of wealth, you always had to use upper middle class or better as a jumping point) to get minorities into prime, headlining roles, so think that one over. Which minority would have been allowed to truly star in any of those that you mentioned?


----------



## ChicagoMediaMan-27 (Feb 23, 2008)

JosephM said:


> lobster tacos


This has nothing to do with the thread, but lobster tacos sound amazing. I've never heard of such a thing. I will have to seek some out sometime.


----------



## JosephM (Dec 17, 2008)

rlp271, I never studied Sociology at the college level, so I'll take your word for it.

But are you really theorizing that when you study the poor, you only study Afro-American and Latin people?


Just curious...


JM


----------



## JosephM (Dec 17, 2008)

ChicagoMediaMan-27 said:


> This has nothing to do with the thread, but lobster tacos sound amazing. I've never heard of such a thing. I will have to seek some out sometime.


_The _recipe, from Executive Chef Dean Fearing himself:

https://topchefs.chef2chef.net/recipes-2/fearing/lobster-taco-yellow-tomato-salsa-jicama-salad.htm

JM


----------



## Quay (Mar 29, 2008)

JosephM said:


> I don't think you would recognize what The Mansion has evolved into if you went back today. No lobster tacos, no dress code for "The Main Restaurant."....


I can see not adhering to Dean's menus and style (every new exec chef wants to change things) but no dress code?  That is just bad and wrong.

Geez. I guess I really did have it very, very good in the 80's. And not just because there weren't any cell phones brringgging! in the middle of a meal!


----------



## JosephM (Dec 17, 2008)

Quay said:


> I can see not adhering to Dean's menus and style (every new exec chef wants to change things) but no dress code?  That is just bad and wrong.


Yep, it was big news in 2007 when The Mansion refurbished and re-opened their restaurant. In the main dining room, you can wear "nice" (non-frayed) jeans, but no tennis shoes or T-shirts.

In the quite small "Chef's Room," gentlemen must still wear jackets.

JM


----------



## Quay (Mar 29, 2008)

JosephM said:


> _The _recipe, from Executive Chef Dean Fearing himself:
> 
> https://topchefs.chef2chef.net/recipes-2/fearing/lobster-taco-yellow-tomato-salsa-jicama-salad.htm
> 
> JM


The are amazing and worth every effort. However, according to my first edition copy of _The Mansion on Turtle Creek Cookbook_, that link is not the correct recipe and leaves out a lot of key things. Such as the fresh tortillas!


----------



## Quay (Mar 29, 2008)

JosephM said:


> Yep, it was big news in 2007 when The Mansion refurbished and re-opened their restaurant. In the main dining room, you can wear "nice" (non-frayed) jeans, but no tennis shoes or T-shirts.
> 
> In the quite small "Chef's Room," gentlemen must still wear jackets.
> 
> JM


Good grief. At least no t-shirts? Well that is something, but not very much. My, my. I remember the day an entourage of Hollywood "A-list" people arrived including Sting. He did not have on a jacket and tie as required but was dressed in handsome and traditional Indian men's evening dress attire. The ever-quick _maître d'hôtel_ determined that since he was in the very proper evening dress for someone in the finest places in India, The Mansion could do no less than honor such international élan and he was seated. But you bet your sweep bippy that if he'd been in jeans he'd not have dined there that night!


----------



## rlp271 (Feb 12, 2009)

JosephM said:


> rlp271, I never studied Sociology at the college level, so I'll take your word for it.
> 
> But are you really theorizing that when you study the poor, you only study Afro-American and Latin people?
> 
> ...


I wouldn't want to say only (I grew up in a very poor town in Wisconsin, so I KNOW that poor people are of every race), but at my time in University the two always seemed to go hand in hand. It was hard to ger professors to pry away the poor label from black and hispanic groups when you discussed papers and writing. I also went to an ultra-liberal but still largely white school (NYU), where many of the kids are upper-middle class and distraught over the guilt they endure from white man's burden. I honestly don't know what it's like at other universities, but from what I've seen, it's hard to get most people to admit that there's a huge number of poor whites in the US. The fact that academia, or at least my experience with it, tied poverty so closely to race shows just how institutionalized the racism really is.


----------



## pt4u67 (Apr 27, 2006)

Cruising restaurants and the society pages of the local newspaper is a somewhat shallow criteria for determining integration.


----------



## misterdonuts (Feb 15, 2008)

Integration has been quite a fashionable word for some time now, but is it necessarily a desirable thing? It just seems to me that once it is really achieved, one ends up drowning in blandness and sameness. I wonder if there is a happy median between integration and segregation, such as mutual respect. Integration just seems unnatural. Just to be clear, I am not referring to individual cases and choices such as mixed race marriages but to a macro level phenomenon. For example, I see nothing necessarily undesirable about ethnocentric neighbourhoods.

For proponents of integration, how does one decide whose set of ideals the various constituents will adopt? If it is to be a melange of ideals, then who decides which bits to keep and which ones to discard and from whom? Is there an arbitrator, and if yes, how does one qualify as an arbitrator?


----------



## Mike Petrik (Jul 5, 2005)

radix023 said:


> Living in Atlanta, I see integration at work, at lunch and on public transport all the time. But I see segregation every Sunday.


This is largely an African-American choice. In Atlanta there is a storied AA church tradition, and many AAs value that tradition too much to risk its atrophy by attending predominately white churches, although some do, just as some whites attend predominately AA churches. One exception is Catholic churches, which are much more integrated due to the fact that there was never a tradition of different churches among Catholics in Atlanta. My Catholic parish is probably 70% white, with the rest being Latino, AA, and Asian, a demographic that pretty much reflects the area the parish serves.


----------



## Mike Petrik (Jul 5, 2005)

The answer to the initial question is yes, it is only a matter of time. Races are an evolutionary peculiarity that happened only because of distance and tribalism. Tribalism alone is not enough, and as the world gets smaller intermarriage will eventually eliminate races as we understand them today. The US melting pot experience is a precurser to the this phenomenon. 

Misterdonuts is correct that something is lost as the world's several races melt away, but it is inevitable and on balance probably for the best.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

radix023 said:


> Living in Atlanta, I see integration at work, at lunch and on public transport all the time. But I see segregation every Sunday.


Your post reminded me of my first church experience as a newly relocated resident of Starkville, MS, 30 years ago. Approaching our first Sunday in town we had looked in the Yellow pages to get the address of the church for our denomination. On Sunday we showed up a few minutes before the start of services and found ourselves to be the only white couple (or singles) in a congregation of perhaps two hundred. As the services proceeded, needless to say, we were a curiosity to many in the congregation and were perhaps more than just a bit self-conscious and somewhat uncomfortable. At one point, a black gentleman, sitting next to me, leaned over and whispered, "Welcome to our church but, is this where you wanted to be?"

After services he explained that the white congregation for the church was in a different location in town. We shared a laugh over my predicament and then he clapped me on the shoulder and introduced us to another couple and we were being encouraged to attend the adult Sunday school class. After that, my wife and I most often attended services with the white congregation but, would occasionally attend services with the black congregation. If we had not been outsiders, just relocated to Starkville, I don't know that we could have done that. I am convinced that the barriers we build, in our minds or by our practices, do not serve us well, regardless of the color of our respective hides!


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

I am a member of a large (several thousand members) Southern Baptist Church that has only a handful of black families in the congregation. 

About eight years ago I happened to attend a service at a large Black Southern Baptist Church in the area where I found only a handful of White faces. All I can say is that I only hope and pray that minority guests at my Church are as well received as I was at that predominately Black Church.

Having said that, I found the services at the two Churches to be very different despite the fact that anyone who has ever attended a traditional Southern Baptist Church would have no problem recognizing both of them as being Southern Baptist. But still, they were very different. The Black service was much more animated and more lively, more of an audience participation event. Afterwards you sort of feel like you've been to the gym for a workout. I don't mean this in a bad way; it was just different and I suspect this is cultural more than anything.

This experience gave me more insight into why I think there is so much segregation on Sunday. In our voluntary associations we naturally tend to migrate toward what is most comfortable for us on the basis of our cultural backgrounds. 

For example, years ago I can remember going to a club to hear Doc Watson one weekend, and then going to the same club the next weekend to hear Bobby 'Blue' Bland. Predictably one audience was almost all White while the other was almost all Black. To me this doesn't represent segregation nor does it mean a lack of intergration. The key factor is how welcome Blacks were made to feel at Watson's show and how welcome White's were at Blands's show, and in both cases they were most welcomed. If anything I think the majority at both shows took pride in seeing this aspect of their particular culture being enjoyed, or at the least being experienced, by others.

Cruiser


----------



## JosephM (Dec 17, 2008)

pt4u67 said:


> Cruising restaurants and the society pages of the local newspaper is a somewhat shallow criteria for determining integration.


I'm not so sure I agree, pt. The point of my OP was that at least in Dallas, Afro-Americans tend to be informally barred from a certain part of society because of their race--in this case, fine restaurants and decidedly upscale social events.

After all, public schools and transportation have been forced to integrate due to Federal law, so I could hardly create a thesis based upon my observations there...

JM


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

JosephM said:


> After all, public schools and transportation have been forced to integrate *due to Federal law*, so I could hardly create a thesis based upon my observations there...


As opposed to restaurants? LOL.


----------



## JosephM (Dec 17, 2008)

PedanticTurkey said:


> As opposed to restaurants? LOL.


Well, if the same laws regarding integration apply to restaurants, I've never seen the President order Federal Troops to go to one to enforce its integration...

In other words, I think your post is what is commonly referred to on internet forums as "Cherry-Picking," which is only responding to a part of the post that you is thought to be incorrect, which has little or nothing to do with the _entire_ message of the post.

Generally, posts that "Cherry-Pick" are deemed to an illogical way to conduct an argument, and usually add very little to the discussion at hand.

JM


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

I'm not sure how you think it's cherry picking. Restaurants and other places of public accomodation (if that's the correct phrase) were in fact desegregated by federal law, though it didn't get the same attention as public schools or the busses.

What I was saying is that I'm not sure why you'd even make the statement. Do you believe there's some kind of express or overt discrimination at work?


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

PT,

I am as puzzled as you. JM is not sure he is even bothered about the situation, whether it is nefarious or not. One wonders why he even posted the thread. Perhaps he wanted us to know he dines at high end restaurants and that he is dismayed at the current state of the Mansion at Turtle Creek. 

Funny that one is bothered by the decline of restaurant but not by the fact that we may never be a fully integrated society.

Karl


----------



## Quay (Mar 29, 2008)

Karl89 said:


> PT,
> 
> I am as puzzled as you. JM is not sure he is even bothered about the situation, whether it is nefarious or not. One wonders why he even posted the thread. Perhaps he wanted us to know he dines at high end restaurants and that he is dismayed at the current state of the Mansion at Turtle Creek.
> 
> ...


Legal separation ended years ago in the US. The informal segregation--that simple, pernicious habit--is slowly ending as older generations die and younger ones without the habit grow up. As Mike Petrik rightly points out, the world is moving towards being one race and the US won't be left out of this movement. It is just a matter of time.

As for eating at The Mansion, some folks of all colors rightly think that paying $200 per person for dinner is just silly when at many, many other places in Dallas you can get a whole lot more, better-tasting food for a whole lot less money. :icon_smile:


----------



## JosephM (Dec 17, 2008)

Quay said:


> As for eating at The Mansion, some folks of all colors rightly think that paying $200 per person for dinner is just silly when at many, many other places in Dallas you can get a whole lot more, better-tasting food for a whole lot less money. :icon_smile:


I respectfully take exception to that, Quay. For my money, the impeccable food and service at the "old" Mansion on Turtle Creek Restaurant was well worth it. I'd rather spend one evening there than spend the same amount of money on four dinners someplace else.

JM


----------



## Crownship (Mar 17, 2008)

JosephM said:


> I also read the society pages of the Dallas _Morning News_ on a regular basis. In pictures covering upscale events, you may see _a_ black face every six months or so.
> So, I ask, rather than an implicit segregation, *does it appear to be that there are still subtle methods in place which prevent Afro-Americans from being comfortable (and therefore present) at certain places and events?*
> If that is in fact going on, would you term that a form of social segregation?
> JM


 What is your definition
of subtle methods of segregation?

Do you believe they exist?

Do you practice those subtle methods?

I'm just curious.


----------



## Quay (Mar 29, 2008)

JosephM said:


> I respectfully take exception to that, Quay. For my money, the impeccable food and service at the "old" Mansion on Turtle Creek Restaurant was well worth it. I'd rather spend one evening there than spend the same amount of money on four dinners someplace else.
> 
> JM


It should go without saying that it is all a matter of personal tastes. One person's feast is another's inedible nightmare. For me, some of the absolutely finest meals of my life came off Fearing's line at The Mansion in the 80's but other diners had a hard time with his innovations. I think he proved them silly as he established Southwestern cuisine to 3-star Michellin levels, but others would disagree mightily. *shrug*


----------



## TMMKC (Aug 2, 2007)

Quay said:


> I think he proved them silly as he established Southwestern cuisine to 3-star Michellin levels, but others would disagree mightily. *shrug*


So...would you say he did a good job "integrating" that particular cuisine into the menu?:icon_smile_big: Sorry...couldn't help myself.


----------



## JosephM (Dec 17, 2008)

TMMKC said:


> So...would you say he did a good "integrating" that particular cuisine into the menu?:icon_smile_big: Sorry...couldn't help myself.


That was quite clever, TMMKC. A bit of well placed humor is never out of place.

JM


----------



## Quay (Mar 29, 2008)

TMMKC said:


> So...would you say he did a good job "integrating" that particular cuisine into the menu?:icon_smile_big: Sorry...couldn't help myself.


*L* Restraint is not necessary. heheh. He went beyond "integrate" as he created it. He was a great pioneer in the world of cooking and is still doing very well indeed. But maybe, just maybe he did integrate some things. From his original Mansion cookbook:

"Grilled spring chicken with a spicy red onion-poblano chili relish, two sauces of smoked red and roasted yellow bell peppers, and Granny Fearing's Kentucky baked beans."

The chicken and sauces are pure Southwestern innovative delights and putting them together with a traditional Appalachian dish is a real integration! (And incredibly tasty, too, if memory serves. And in this case it does as I well remember it!)


----------



## pt4u67 (Apr 27, 2006)

JosephM said:


> I'm not so sure I agree, pt. The point of my OP was that at least in Dallas, Afro-Americans tend to be informally barred from a certain part of society because of their race--in this case, fine restaurants and decidedly upscale social events.
> 
> After all, public schools and transportation have been forced to integrate due to Federal law, so I could hardly create a thesis based upon my observations there...
> 
> JM


You are basing your comments on your observations of a few establishments. You admitted that you frequent these restaurants infrequently and I don't know what to tell you about the "society" section of the newspaper but to extract from that an informal barring of minorities from certain establishments is ridiculous!

We're the most integrated nation on the earth. That's not to say that there is not bigotry present but it is hardly institutional.


----------



## Pentheos (Jun 30, 2008)

Here's a question: why should we be fully integrated? Cui bono?

I ask in all seriousness, too.


----------



## pt4u67 (Apr 27, 2006)

Pentheos said:


> Here's a question: why should we be fully integrated? Cui bono?
> 
> I ask in all seriousness, too.


For the same reason that we have to save the planet. Because when enough people repeat the same thing it becomes conventional wisdom. I don't even know what integration means anymore. How much more integrated can we become?

There are certain cultural proclivities that are inherent to certain ethnic groups. For some reason, certain members of our society find these difference insulting and view it as something to be reconciled. Its really quite absurd.

I urge those who think we have an integration problem to visit our southern neighbor and see how they treat there native population, or visit France and see how North African immigrants are housed in virtual ghettos with little chance of social mobility.


----------



## Claybuster (Aug 29, 2007)

Cruiser said:


> This experience gave me more insight into why I think there is so much segregation on Sunday. In our voluntary associations we naturally tend to migrate toward what is most comfortable for us on the basis of our cultural backgrounds.
> 
> Cruiser


This basically is a good definition of the "Homogeneous Unit Principle" introduced by Donald McGavran, a church growth specialist years ago. Simply put, people want to worship (among other things) with people they have something in common with, i.e. race/culture, hobbies, political leanings, family etc. 
I have been in the ministry many years and I have always heard the phrase, "Sunday morning at 11:00 am is the most segregated time in the U.S." So what if it is. If it is, then it is because the people themselves have CHOSEN to be segregated. Bottom line, most people want to be among others they feel comfortable with. Is that such a bad thing. Not if is of their own choosing and most (if not all) of the time, it is.

Listen, anyone of any race is welcome to worship at most churches (including mine) , but again, people go to assimilate with others who want to worship in a way they are comfortable with. Why do most blacks go to black churches? They like the style of worship offered there. Why do most whites go to white churches? Because they like the style of worship offered there. See a pattern developing here, folks?

The "Homogeneous Unit Principle" isn't necessarily good or bad. It is just life. That is the way it is. It isn't a racial thing, it is just that people are accustomed to different styles of worship. One can apply this principle to many facets of life.

Danny


----------



## Crownship (Mar 17, 2008)

JosephM said:


> I dine every few months at restaurants at two five-star hotels in Dallas, The Mansion on Turtle Creek and the Ritz-Carlton. _Never_ do I see a black face among the fellow diners.
> 
> I also read the society pages of the Dallas _Morning News_ on a regular basis. In pictures covering upscale events, you may see _a_ black face every six months or so.
> 
> ...





Crownship said:


> What is your definition
> of subtle methods of segregation?
> 
> Do you believe they exist?
> ...


Lots of interesting subtopics on this thread that bunny trailed away from the OP questions.

My questions seems to have gotten avoided for some odd reason.
To the OP, JosephM, again
What is your definition of subtle methods of segragation?
Do YOU believe these methods exist in reality?
Do you practice these subtle methods of segregation, whatever your definition is?

I'm curious for the sake of being educated.

You did post this thread for educational purposes and to learn yourself. Right?


----------



## jpeirpont (Mar 16, 2004)

In every city there exist upper and middle income Blacks, in some cities they even have their own neighborhoods. Most people like the be around people similar to them and generally go to restaurants that serve the food they enjoy. Though in CT I see Black in most good restaurants, we generally don't take restaurants as serious as the white people here.
Black American culture is the most American of cultures in the U.S aside from WASP culture, if that exists anymore. Black American culture is also pretty integrated in itself being a sub set of general American cullture, deriving from West African cultures, and having Native American influences. Also much of American culture is derivative of African American culture, along with many others, so there isn't more cultural integration to be had. Physically there is much segregation and I say so what so long as it isn't government mandated. My preference is to live in a middle class Black neighborhood, fortunately in my part of the country it is possible. I don't think anyone white, Black or otherwise should be condemned for that.


----------



## rmcnabb (Feb 25, 2009)

TMMKC said:


> I think we, as a society, worry too much about integration. I do not support segregation at all, and feel every person has the right to do and go where he/she damn-well pleases (as long as they're not breaking the law, etc.).
> 
> We're a society of tribes (gender, ethnic, economic, etc.) and sometimes a tribe needs to keep to itself...and not be chastised for doing so.


Well said. I think African Americans self segregate, just like all ethnic groups. I have on many occasions been told not to go to such-and-such place because as a caucasian I was not welcome. This is part of growing up in the south, and to pretend it doesn't happen is to either live a life of extreme privelege, or one of self delusion.

All groups self segregate, to a certain extent. Wars are usually fought over this human tendency. Religious, ethnic, economic, racial...it's all been said before. Look at Yugoslavia - oh, wait...there is no more Yugoslavia. Sorry.

Are African Americans welcome at every level of American society? Yes, they are. Just look at the White House. Are there still places (country clubs, namely) that sort of conveniently don't have any African Americans as members? Yes, that's true too. Are there places in America that, if I go into them, I'll get very seriously stared down because I'm white? You bet there are. Who is excluding whom?

Racism and classism are very finely woven together, and probably always will be. We're just human beings after all, for all our fancy clothes.

And it is also folly to think that all cultures equip their members equally for success in the modern world. There are many cultures, and subcultures, that do a very good job of keeping its members "down", for a variety of reasons. But it's not polite, or in many cases allowed, to notice this.


----------



## pt4u67 (Apr 27, 2006)

Underlying the notion that we are not an integrated society is a subtle sort of racism. Most of the time the term integration, or lack thereof, is used in the context of blacks not frequenting the same establishments (restaurants, schools, etc.) as whites, rarely though the other way around. But that's besides the point.

The racism is of a sublime sort in that this so called lack of integration assumes that it is whites who are keeping out, or otherwise making it difficult for, blacks and other minorities to participate. It assumes a power and cleverness on the part of the majority race in contrast to the lack of power, passivity and lack of wisdom on the part of the minority. It assumes that it is out of the power of the minority to do anything about this exclusion. 

Of course, it would insult our modern and therapeutic sensibilities to assume that there exits among ethnic groups a desire to share in a common culture and be perfectly comfortable with it. We see professionals of all races and cultures working together yet going home and watching different television programs, different sports, eating different foods, listening to different music and otherwise engaging in cultural activities with which they are comfortable.


----------



## Crownship (Mar 17, 2008)

pt4u67 said:


> Underlying the notion that we are not an integrated society is a subtle sort of racism. Most of the time the term integration, or lack thereof, is used in the context of blacks not frequenting the same establishments (restaurants, schools, etc.) as whites, rarely though the other way around. But that's besides the point.
> 
> *The racism is of a sublime sort in that this so called lack of integration assumes that it is whites who are keeping out, or otherwise making it difficult for, blacks and other minorities to participate. It assumes a power and cleverness on the part of the majority race in contrast to the lack of power, passivity and lack of wisdom on the part of the minority. It assumes that it is out of the power of the minority to do anything about this exclusion. *
> 
> Of course, it would insult our modern and therapeutic sensibilities to assume that there exits among ethnic groups a desire to share in a common culture and be perfectly comfortable with it. We see professionals of all races and cultures working together yet going home and watching different television programs, different sports, eating different foods, listening to different music and otherwise engaging in cultural activities with which they are comfortable.


I couldn't have said it better.

I was going to comment more on this thread but others said well enough what I was thinking.

I would have liked to hear the OPs, JosephM answers to my questions.
But he's gotten himself barred.
Seems like the OP assumed he had the power to continue posting. Oh well.

Ironic how he got barred from a forum that's fully integrated.


----------



## Miket61 (Mar 1, 2008)

Crownship said:


> I would have liked to hear the OPs, JosephM answers to my questions. But he's gotten himself barred.


I hadn't noticed that... hmm... how lightly should we tread on this sensitive topic?

Here in Atlanta, there is one of the largest concentrations of African-American wealth in the United States. The society pages (as well as _Seasons_ and _Atlanta Season_ magazines) feature many "integrated" events. All-black events seem to be charity functions for groups who state explicitly that their beneficiaries are black (UNCF, for example).

Restaurants and hotels are both considered by the courts to be engaged in Interstate Commerce and thus regulated by the federal government. The _Heart of Atlanta Motel_ case established the precedent for hotels.

Ironically, the owner of the Heart of Atlanta was an attorney whose family estate was confiscated by the courts in a malpractice judgement; it was later bought by Tyler Perry, the television and movie producer. The attorney has filed so many lawsuits against Mr. Perry, even after losing repeatedly, that he's been banned from filing suit about _anything_ in most of the jurisdictions in the Atlanta metro area.


----------



## newtothis (Apr 13, 2009)

JosephM said:


> So, I ask, rather than an implicit segregation, does it appear to be that there are still subtle methods in place which prevent Afro-Americans from being comfortable (and therefore present) at certain places and events?
> 
> If that is in fact going on, would you term that a form of social segregation?


How do you know it's not self-segregation?

Furthermore - what percentage of Blacks are the population of Dallas?

I'm so entirely sick of people blaming Whites in this country, or acting like we're the racists. If people bothered to look other races are just as bad, if not worst. Furthermore, Europe & America are the ones importing millions from all over the world basically sealing the fate of White people becoming minorities in their own countries. Do you think Japan, China, Nigeria, Mexico or any other country besides say the United Kingdom, France, the United States, Australia, Canada, etc would do that ? (Whites have been basically told to cheer this kind of behavior -- becoming minorities in their own countries -- onward like it is some sort of beneficial policy).

Why the hell does everyone need to be 'integrated'? Did you ever realize most people don't WANT TO BE INTEGRATED FORCIBLY? I sure as hell don't need someone telling me who I need to hang out with. It's like affirmative action where you need to hire the least qualified... or these pointless discrimination suits where you can sue if you aren't White and claim racism.

Did anyone read about the recent story where a fire department in New Haven Connecticut had an exam for promotion? Essentially, the White firefighters and one Hispanic passed the test but all the Blacks failed. Was it because the Black examinees did not try as hard or did not study as they should have? No, of course it was racism, so the city threw out the test and did not promote any of the White firefighters who had earned the promotion. This is how ridiculous we have become.

Another example is the Black crime rate. Over half the homicides in the United States are committed by Black people who are less than 15% of the population. Are programs and policies being implemented to combat this challenge? No, of course not. It's White Racism which is causing Black people to go out there and murder each other at such disproportional rates.

And how exactly does anyone expect this country to be 'integrated' when you continuously import millions of legal and illegal immigrants from Latin America who have no desire to learn English, become American, or even wave the American flag over the flag of Mexico, Bolivia, etc? The very fact, again, that the policy of somehow cheering on Whites becoming a minority in Europe & America is so suicidal, so stupid, that other peoples or country would dare do it. We've been brainwashed to cheer for it.



Mike Petrik said:


> The answer to the initial question is yes, it is only a matter of time. Races are an evolutionary peculiarity that happened only because of distance and tribalism. Tribalism alone is not enough, and as the world gets smaller intermarriage will eventually eliminate races as we understand them today. The US melting pot experience is a precurser to the this phenomenon.


This isn't going to happen. Maybe the White race will disappear but no other group will.
Honestly, Europe is allowing millions from the Middle East and Africa in, often as a detriment to their crime rates and causing religious problems. The United States, Canada, Australia are also cheering for this self-suicide policy of allowing millions to come and overtake their native populations. They've been brainwashed to accept it, promote it and allow it. Hopefully someday this will change.

This self-destruction is not going on in China, Nigeria, or any other country in the globe. NO OTHER peoples is doing such a stupid thing. So while Whites may be gone, it's really not going to happen in Asia (where 2/3rds of the world population resides) or elsewhere.

And if diversity is so great, as we've been told to believe, why would we want to allow races and ethnicity to disappear? Quite honestly, when the majority of the world's scientific & technological achievements are situated in such few areas -- such as the 'White' countries and East Asia -- again, I can't see how this policy is going to help anyone.



Mike Petrik said:


> Misterdonuts is correct that something is lost as the world's several races melt away, but it is inevitable and on balance probably for the best.


See above why this isn't going to happen. Africa's population is exploding where the birth rate is something like 6.1. Asia's is always growing. The only race that is going to 'melt away' are those who self-destruct and fail to reproduce (the White countries where Whites will be a minority in the U.K, France, Germany, the U.S in a few years -- and Japan which will remain homogeneous because they value their people and culture unlike Europeans who seem to hate themselves but their population is declining and they do not reproduce).

And like I said -- it's not for the best when the world's technological centers and advancements are situated in a few countries and peoples. Do you honestly think Africa will pick up this slack?

I could go into a 'Black' or 'Hispanic' restaurant and see very few White people, if any, should I be claiming segregation and covert racism? This stuff really irritates me.


----------



## newtothis (Apr 13, 2009)

JosephM said:


> Now you have opened up a Pandora's box! *All my close friends are caucasian. *Perhaps I am a product of my environment, or perhaps I am merely a symptom of the issue I presented in my OP.


You say that like it's a problem or something to feel bad about.

lol - how ridiculously brainwashed we've allowed ourselves to become. People feel closer and more connected to people who are like them, and that includes looks, it is innate and not something we should feel bad about.


----------



## newtothis (Apr 13, 2009)

Quay said:


> As Mike Petrik rightly points out, the world is moving towards being one race and the US won't be left out of this movement. It is just a matter of time.


See my previous post on why I think your statement is so stupid. As if moving towards 'one race' is something to cheer on (it's not -- i thought 'diversity is great?) - the world is less diverse than ever. With the populations exploding in the Middle East, Asia, and Africa... if any race is going to disappear it will be White people due to low population and high immigration but that's about it.


----------



## newtothis (Apr 13, 2009)

pt4u67 said:


> or visit France and see how North African immigrants are housed in virtual ghettos with little chance of social mobility.


If they have it so tough maybe they should go back to North Africa or stop rioting and burning cars all over France? The French should of never tolerated these problems to begin with. The riots and astronomical social welfare spending and crime issues should have been stomped on from the get-go.


----------



## Quay (Mar 29, 2008)

newtothis said:


> See my previous post on why I think your statement is so stupid.


There is nothing worth seeing.



> As if moving towards 'one race' is something to cheer on (it's not -- i thought 'diversity is great?) - the world is less diverse than ever.


if you think "diversity" is defined by the external pigmentation of one's skin then you perhaps have much yet to experience and hopefully learn.



> With the populations exploding in the Middle East, Asia, and Africa... if any race is going to disappear it will be White people due to low population and high immigration but that's about it.


"White" is just a color term for race but doesn't have any fixed meaning. Are Germans white? Some would say yes, unless they happen to also be Jewish.

If you fear the "disappearance" of that which you value then perhaps it would be better to clarify what you value or at least state it openly instead of engaging in transparently racist arguments. Just a thought.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

newtothis, 

I think the forum on Stormfront would be more to your liking.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

newtothis said:


> How do you know it's not self-segregation?
> 
> Furthermore - what percentage of Blacks are the population of Dallas?
> 
> ...


Newtothis: Opinions such as those expressed by you in the referenced quote, really disturb me. I keep hoping such hardened, destructive perceptions will eventually soften, as the person harboring them ages and matures but, such enlightenment sometimes never happens. As an aging WASP (white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant) male, I will tell you that much of what I perceived as black and white, while in my 20's, seems to have a lot more grey areas almost 40 years later. Over this period of time, I have had the misfortune to see too many whites, blacks, Hispanics, and Orientals with their insides laid open on various fields of battle and on long forgotten street locations in this country...

...and I will share with you two realities: first, while our skin color may differ, we all look remarkably alike on the inside and second, yes, based on our ethnicity, we may live our lives consistent with differing cultural norms but, when it come time to die, we all die the same way. Indeed, I sincerely hope you will one day realize that in the aggregate, we are more alike than we are different!


----------



## Mike Petrik (Jul 5, 2005)

newtothis said:


> How do you know it's not self-segregation?
> 
> Furthermore - what percentage of Blacks are the population of Dallas?
> 
> ...


The fact that you may be irritated does not excuse such a stupid incoherent rant. To borrow from Ronald Reagan, your problem isn't so much that you don't know anything, it's that so much of what you know is just plain wrong.


----------



## Xhine23 (Jan 17, 2008)

eagle2250 said:


> Newtothis: Opinions such as those expressed by you in the referenced quote, really disturb me. I keep hoping such hardened, destructive perceptions will eventually soften, as the person harboring them ages and matures but, such enlightenment sometimes never happens. As an aging WASP (white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant) male, I will tell you that much of what I perceived as black and white, while in my 20's, seems to have a lot more grey areas almost 40 years later. Over this period of time, I have had the misfortune to see too many whites, blacks, Hispanics, and Orientals with their insides laid open on various fields of battle and on long forgotten street locations in this country...
> 
> ...and I will share with you two realities: first, while our skin color may differ, we all look remarkably alike on the inside and second, yes, based on our ethnicity, we may live our lives consistent with differing cultural norms but, *when it come time to die, we all die the same way*. Indeed, I sincerely hope you will one day realize that in the aggregate, we are more alike than we are different!


Its the same words I've been using all my adult life.
I've found myself in some very awkward/strange/.... situations many times in my life and the only thing keep me enjoying those situations is death. Death doesn't have time to choose age/race/culture.etc.etc


----------



## newtothis (Apr 13, 2009)

Quay said:


> If you fear the "disappearance" of that which you value then perhaps it would be better to clarify what you value or at least state it openly instead of engaging in transparently racist arguments. Just a thought.


'Transparently racist arguments'?

What exactly did I write that was 'racist'? It's gotten to the point in this country that being a Big Bad Evil Racist is akin to be a murderer, child molester or worse.

And sorry, I don't believe the disappearance of White people is something to cheer on. It seems like every other group or ethnicity is allowed to have racial proud yet somehow when it comes to White people it's off limits. Sorry, I don't see China, Japan, Botswana or any other country allowing their people to be outbred in their own countries due to immigration.

If you want to respond to my points fine -- but actually respond to them, don't shout out "OMG THE RACIST" and then run and hide. Absolutely ridiculous that people are so stupid.


----------



## newtothis (Apr 13, 2009)

Mike Petrik said:


> The fact that you may be irritated does not excuse such a stupid incoherent rant.


I see a lot of ad-hominem but no real response to any point made. The only idiot here is you Petrik. Until you actually bother to counter a point, or at least make a valid argument, keep your insults to yourself.



Mike Petrik said:


> To borrow from Ronald Reagan, your problem isn't so much that you don't know anything, it's that so much of what you know is just plain wrong.


Then point it out. It's easy to spout out blank insults like an imbecile when you don't need to argue or back anything up. What a Moron.


----------



## bigchris1313 (Apr 16, 2009)

newtothis said:


> And sorry, I don't believe the disappearance of White people is something to cheer on. It seems like every other group or ethnicity is allowed to have racial proud yet somehow when it comes to White people it's off limits. Sorry, I don't see China, Japan, Botswana or any other country allowing their people to be outbred in their own countries due to immigratio


And therein lies the difficulty of being an ethnically heterogenous nation-state. I suppose the question of whether you care if the "white race" dies depends on whether you identify primarily as a white or as an American. This sort of thing is easy to do in Germany, for example. A German is a German is a German. Most Western European nation-states are similar. Clearly, as we enter the Balkans, this becomes more difficult-Woodrow Wilson be damned-but you get the idea.

But with the exception of its early history-toting a gargantuan asterisk given the sizable slave population-the US has never been an ethnically homogenous state. This was often a problem for ethnic minorities; however, over time each minority group in turn was assimilated into the nation-state, yielding the extremely heterogenous mix of ethnicities we have today. In 2008, the dominant identity of the American state is "American." So when one talks about the loss-due to the correlation between lower birthrates and higher income levels-of "white America," it does not seem as scary, because America, even with its majority white population, is not an exclusively white state.

Things are a little different in Japan or France. Japanese are Japanese are Japanse. A Frenchman is a Frenchman is a Frenchmen. These are nation-states in the Wilsonian tradition: a state comprised of a single nation (people). If Japanese start getting outbred by white, they won't let in any more whites. In France, the North African immigrants are having an extremely hard time assimilating because the French populace has great difficulty understanding a French identity that is exclusive of French blood. Israel is another great example of this quandary: how does a state whose identity is inherently Jewish deal with an exploding Arab Muslim birth rate?

The US is truly the great exception in this regard. Against all odds, the state has become a stable, liberal, Western Democracy-a world power no less-while maintaining an ethnically heterogenous population, which typically works against both stability and democratization. Even though each ethnic group has some sort of smaller identity, the amorphous "American" identity is the predominant identity of the state, thank God. This allows us to have a state without ethnic warfare and tribal conflicts (for those of you claiming that we do, please see Iraq circa 2005-2006 for a _real_ example). One cost of this non-ethnic state identity is that ethnic groups might be outbred and eventually die out or simply become a new minority. That's the bizarre elegance of the grand American experiment.

That's why most people aren't as concerned about the "white American" race dying out. Americans can be different colors while still remaining legitimate Americans. If Germany is overrun by Turks-who can never become Germans by virtue of their non-Germany ethnicity-"Germany" will cease to exist, hence the desire to preserve the German population. In creating a super-ethnic state identity, the US has ensured that, while the colors of its citizenry might change with time, the state as we know it will continue to exist.


----------

