This article is largely about how overzealous whites end up defining what must be considered offensive or not, often disregarding what the minorities themselves think about that. As a black man,...
This article is largely about how overzealous whites end up defining what must be considered offensive or not, often disregarding what the minorities themselves think about that.
As a black man, that is something I am familiar with.
Speaking as a white guy with only one or two black friends, please feel free to speak up on what you feel is racist, or conversely if you don't feel that something is racist. We all have different...
Speaking as a white guy with only one or two black friends, please feel free to speak up on what you feel is racist, or conversely if you don't feel that something is racist. We all have different points of view, and that's fine.
I think that defining whether or not something is racist/offensive is a duty that we share as a society, no matter the color of our skin.
On a related note - CNN had a story in the business section on the 20th that talked about how 3 black employees at a Kraft Heinz factory were terrorized with death threats, and shit like that makes my blood boil. No one deserves to be harassed or made to feel unsafe because of their skin color. Source
Thanks! To be quite frank, in places like Tildes my concern, my natural tendency, is to tell people to chill out. Tilderinos are overwhelmingly not racist, and sometimes I think they waste a lot...
Thanks!
To be quite frank, in places like Tildes my concern, my natural tendency, is to tell people to chill out. Tilderinos are overwhelmingly not racist, and sometimes I think they waste a lot of energy trying to demonstrate that to their presumably white peers. You don't need to prove yourself to me, I know Tildes is cool. The minutiae of your language is not as important as your perceived intent. You guys are okay. So relax! That's how I feel at least...
One aspect of the 'interesting responses' that often gets overlooked is that some people aren't ready to have an honest conversation about how to undo racism in the world, but it may open the eyes...
One aspect of the 'interesting responses' that often gets overlooked is that some people aren't ready to have an honest conversation about how to undo racism in the world, but it may open the eyes of some who have been sheltered from the effects of racism. Privileged people from the majority class sometimes do not have exposure to the pervasiveness of racism. It's one thing to recognize how racist slurs are problematic, but what about all the more subtler ways it influences how we internalize and think about things?
I recognize that there's a counterpoint to be made that this may push some people away because spending so much mental effort on something so trivial can frustrate and upset others, but I don't think people spend enough time thinking about how lots of different examples being show cased in the public eye raises general cultural awareness. I don't think there's a perfect way to navigate this - as you mention we have lots of diversity within the world and people are bound to hold different opinions, but I'm of the mindset that more conversations and more education can almost never be a bad thing.
I think it's an important practice to amplify the voices of those who are most directly affected by any certain conversation and to listen to them differently than their majority counterparts. I also don't think it's antithetical to raise the voices of both those who agree changes need to be made as well as those who do not - recognizing and understanding human diversity I think are important for any one human to digest the difficulty and nuance when it comes down to issues. In particular, it makes me think about amplified voices when it comes to something with a much higher cost to the minority group affected - seeing the conversation on master/slave and the black voices that emerged as compared to say, black lives matter, is an important contrast for people to understand where resources should be targeted and how important a particular issue actually is. It's very easy to get lost in the million things wrong with the world and having clear narratives emerge can be an important sorting mechanism.
Unfortunately, honest and constructive conversations about this are nigh-impossible these days.
When properly moderated, I would argue it's actually quite easy to have these conversations. The problem is that by and large on the internet we have mostly failed to learn how to do this.
For the most part it's stuff that is offensive or annoying because it's systemic and just kind of a drag to deal with constantly (e.g. people mispronouncing your name or having common incorrect or...
This article is largely about how overzealous whites end up defining what must be considered offensive or not, often disregarding what the minorities themselves think about that.
For the most part it's stuff that is offensive or annoying because it's systemic and just kind of a drag to deal with constantly (e.g. people mispronouncing your name or having common incorrect or condescending misconceptions about your cultural norms). That gets run through a prism and comes out as some kind of inherently bad thing to say or do even though any individual instance is probably understandable. It seems like what ends up happening is people can't intuitively understand why certain behaviors or words are annoying to deal with on a systemic level, rather than an individual level, so they end up turning systemic problems into matters of individual morality. The only way for them to square that dissonance is to treat saying certain phrases or doing certain things as a sort of "black magic" incantation that manifests racism into the world. But you can't heal by acting like someone has power over you because they exhaled a couple of sounds together. That just gives power in the words and actions back to White people, even if they're well intentioned ones it's just another legacy of condescension. I don't think it's a coincidence that White liberals are more comfortable with a conceptualization that continues to put all the agency in their hands (to not utter the magical racism incantations) and cast the rest of us as perpetual victims.
Under a more chivalric code of honor if someone insulted you then you could demand satisfaction in the way of apology or restitution. This was rooted in an understanding that both people are peers and, as such, owe each other certain kinds of honor and respect. The discourse we have today doesn't provide that. We don't get to feel besmirched and demand satisfaction, after which we can resolve the dispute and part. Instead we are still put in a subordinate position. In this framing of things, we don't have any sort of honor or esteem owed by society. Rather, how we are treated is a way for White people to make a performance of their own magnanimity. This is still not how social peers relate to each other, it is condescending. We don't get to stand proudly and demand satisfaction, we must instead bare our scars and put on this effusive performance of victimization and trauma instead. Being pitied and being respected are not the same.
This article is largely about how overzealous whites end up defining what must be considered offensive or not, often disregarding what the minorities themselves think about that.
As a black man, that is something I am familiar with.
Speaking as a white guy with only one or two black friends, please feel free to speak up on what you feel is racist, or conversely if you don't feel that something is racist. We all have different points of view, and that's fine.
I think that defining whether or not something is racist/offensive is a duty that we share as a society, no matter the color of our skin.
On a related note - CNN had a story in the business section on the 20th that talked about how 3 black employees at a Kraft Heinz factory were terrorized with death threats, and shit like that makes my blood boil. No one deserves to be harassed or made to feel unsafe because of their skin color. Source
Thanks!
To be quite frank, in places like Tildes my concern, my natural tendency, is to tell people to chill out. Tilderinos are overwhelmingly not racist, and sometimes I think they waste a lot of energy trying to demonstrate that to their presumably white peers. You don't need to prove yourself to me, I know Tildes is cool. The minutiae of your language is not as important as your perceived intent. You guys are okay. So relax! That's how I feel at least...
One aspect of the 'interesting responses' that often gets overlooked is that some people aren't ready to have an honest conversation about how to undo racism in the world, but it may open the eyes of some who have been sheltered from the effects of racism. Privileged people from the majority class sometimes do not have exposure to the pervasiveness of racism. It's one thing to recognize how racist slurs are problematic, but what about all the more subtler ways it influences how we internalize and think about things?
I recognize that there's a counterpoint to be made that this may push some people away because spending so much mental effort on something so trivial can frustrate and upset others, but I don't think people spend enough time thinking about how lots of different examples being show cased in the public eye raises general cultural awareness. I don't think there's a perfect way to navigate this - as you mention we have lots of diversity within the world and people are bound to hold different opinions, but I'm of the mindset that more conversations and more education can almost never be a bad thing.
I think it's an important practice to amplify the voices of those who are most directly affected by any certain conversation and to listen to them differently than their majority counterparts. I also don't think it's antithetical to raise the voices of both those who agree changes need to be made as well as those who do not - recognizing and understanding human diversity I think are important for any one human to digest the difficulty and nuance when it comes down to issues. In particular, it makes me think about amplified voices when it comes to something with a much higher cost to the minority group affected - seeing the conversation on master/slave and the black voices that emerged as compared to say, black lives matter, is an important contrast for people to understand where resources should be targeted and how important a particular issue actually is. It's very easy to get lost in the million things wrong with the world and having clear narratives emerge can be an important sorting mechanism.
When properly moderated, I would argue it's actually quite easy to have these conversations. The problem is that by and large on the internet we have mostly failed to learn how to do this.
For the most part it's stuff that is offensive or annoying because it's systemic and just kind of a drag to deal with constantly (e.g. people mispronouncing your name or having common incorrect or condescending misconceptions about your cultural norms). That gets run through a prism and comes out as some kind of inherently bad thing to say or do even though any individual instance is probably understandable. It seems like what ends up happening is people can't intuitively understand why certain behaviors or words are annoying to deal with on a systemic level, rather than an individual level, so they end up turning systemic problems into matters of individual morality. The only way for them to square that dissonance is to treat saying certain phrases or doing certain things as a sort of "black magic" incantation that manifests racism into the world. But you can't heal by acting like someone has power over you because they exhaled a couple of sounds together. That just gives power in the words and actions back to White people, even if they're well intentioned ones it's just another legacy of condescension. I don't think it's a coincidence that White liberals are more comfortable with a conceptualization that continues to put all the agency in their hands (to not utter the magical racism incantations) and cast the rest of us as perpetual victims.
Under a more chivalric code of honor if someone insulted you then you could demand satisfaction in the way of apology or restitution. This was rooted in an understanding that both people are peers and, as such, owe each other certain kinds of honor and respect. The discourse we have today doesn't provide that. We don't get to feel besmirched and demand satisfaction, after which we can resolve the dispute and part. Instead we are still put in a subordinate position. In this framing of things, we don't have any sort of honor or esteem owed by society. Rather, how we are treated is a way for White people to make a performance of their own magnanimity. This is still not how social peers relate to each other, it is condescending. We don't get to stand proudly and demand satisfaction, we must instead bare our scars and put on this effusive performance of victimization and trauma instead. Being pitied and being respected are not the same.