this post was submitted on 17 Jun 2025
603 points (96.6% liked)
Microblog Memes
8163 readers
2905 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
There's two reasons for those hours.
We do have family lunches and dinners occasionally, but that's not an everyday thing, not even a weekly thing. Maybe a yearly thing. Sorry for not having huge houses and doing them at restaurants I guess?
Restaurants stop serving around 4 and start again after 7-8 because they need to clean between the lunch and dinner service. Wild concept I know. Also it's not feasible to keep the kitchen staff there when nobody goes to eat.
The way you present the country is pretty racist to say the least.
Dafuq?
It presents the ever famous image of "lazy Spaniards don't work and have lazy hours.nothing is open ever". That's racist.
Lmao. You need to learn what racist means.
In the Equality Act, race can mean your colour, or your nationality (including your citizenship).
I'm pretty sure I know. Do you?
In any case, we are arguing about semantics. You would agree that the post was prejudicial, right?
It started off with "Spain is not a real place". Learn to take a joke. And he didn't say shit about people of Spain, he made a joke about their hours. Calm down before your head explodes.
It's definitelly Prejudice, and since it's based on nationality rather than on race, it's not by definition Racism (which is the latter kind).
If racisms would be based on race then there would be no racism as we are all one race, the human race.
Two points:
Your "argument" is both egotistic and illogical.
My point is that people equate nationality to a race. So when they are talking negative about a nationality they are indeed racist by the standart of common speech.
If we get scientific and say people are only racist when they talk negative about a race, then the thing falls apart because there is just the human race.
I'm arguing that not just physical appearance is a race in the minds of people, as you say, but nationality too.
My experience - as a Southern European - having lived in various countries in Europe is that people did not see me as having a different race.
They saw me as a having a different Culture, but not actually race, and whilst on more than one occasion when living abroad people expressed prejudiced opinions about me when they didn't knew me well as a person but knew where I came from (which they couldn't tell from the way I looked or even my accent, since I looked like them and my accent was the product of living in multiple countries), when I mentioned that I had lived for almost a decade elsewhere, in Northern Europe, suddenly those prejudices would vanish, all of which leads me to believe it was about the dominant Culture in my life rather than any racial markers.
Further, those people I knew abroad who grew up in the same Culture as me (so, Portuguese) but had a race other than White got an entirelly different treamtment (significantly worse) than I did and which was pretty similar to other people of the same race and not to other Southern Europeans.
Hence why I think that there is Cultural Prejudice which is different from Racial Prejudice and what I read in these posts here sounds a lot more like the former than the latter, though I grant you that it's unclear where one ends and the other starts.
But it is based on race, just an older definition of race. There was a time when southern Europeans were classified as the "olive race". In the bollocks scientific racist hierarchies of the time, that put them below the Aryans, but above the Semites and the blacks. The Nordicist racists of course considered themselves the apex, and looked down on the rest. In the US you guys still remember how the Irish, the Italians, the Greeks, the Poles, the Jews, were very slowly integrated into the category of White, meaning they were not always considered White.
The caricatures of the lazy southerners are indeed racist stereotypes of this past era and to claim that they do not persist in the modern era is kind of weird, seeing how so many other racist stereotypes persist.
Yeah, ok, there are Prejudices around Southern Europeans in general and those are on something other than a specific nationality, though whether or not it adds up to Racial Prejudice rather than Cultural Prejudice is unclear.
I can tell you you that as a Southern European I was an actual victim of Prejudice at times when living in Britain, but only when people actually knew were I came from, since they couldn't actually tell I was from Southern Europe merelly by how I looked or even from the way I spoke (because I had lived in a Northern European country for almost a decade before Britain and had an unusual accent).
Personally, I never felt it was because the way I looked (I easilly passed for English) and instead it was entirelly down to were I grew up in and, interestingly, if I mentioned the years I had spent living in a different country in Northern Europe, those prejudiced expections would normally go away.
That said, I knew of people from my country in Britain who are mixed race and the kind of prejudice they got was very different (and way worse), so maybe there is at least some racial component (i.e. the way they see White Portuguese is different from the way the see Black or Mixed-race Portuguese) in it, but maybe not in the direction the previous poster thinks - it seems to me that Whites only get Cultural Prejudiced whilst those who are Mixed-race and Black get Racist Prejudice.
Absolutely.
I would just however push back on the implicit hierarchy in the way you write it, where cultural prejudice is a smaller degree of prejudice compared to racist prejudice. For example, a black American tourist in, say, N. Ireland, will probably face less prejudice than a white Romanian immigrant. It's all intersections.
Yeah, that's a good point.
I think we agree on viewpoints, we differ more on the definition of racism. I agree that racism classically has been about ethnicity, but in modern days it's more broad. For example:
In the Equality Act, race can mean your colour, or your nationality (including your citizenship).
So if nationality can be qualified as a race, discrimination about nationality should be called racism.
In any case, you can replace racist in my original comment with prejudicial (although racist sounds way more heavy, which is why I prefer it) and it's true anyway.
Yeah, I've seen some Legal Acts were discrimination on nationality was defined as Racism.
I am very wary of using Racism for discrimination based on nationality because, having been victim of discrimination based on my Nationality whilst being an immigrant abroad and having the same "Race" as the people in that country (basically I look the same as they do) and also having seen the discrimination in that same country against acquaintances of mine with the same Nationality as me but not the same Race, the treatment I got was not the same as they got, prejudices against me were was far less frequent and those against them were far worse (though, this one time, negative culturally prejudiced expectations about me did snowball into something huge and highly damaging to me).