[HN Gopher] Who gets to define what's 'racist?' (2020)
___________________________________________________________________
Who gets to define what's 'racist?' (2020)
Author : rayiner
Score : 46 points
Date : 2021-08-20 19:40 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (contexts.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (contexts.org)
| only_as_i_fall wrote:
| This isn't actually about the content, but I will say I find this
| style of using external links really annoying to read. If you're
| going to sprinkle so many links through your article at least
| give me an idea of what they're about.
| gm3dmo wrote:
| I'd be happy with Dave Chappelle defining what's racist.
| inglor_cz wrote:
| 100 years ago, a similar question was posed by Lenin:
|
| "Who, whom?" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who,_whom%3F)
|
| This isn't really about definition of the word; it is about
| political power, because whoever gets this word branded on their
| forehead, loses.
| yasp wrote:
| > _The sovereign is he who selects the null hypothesis._
|
| https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2012/11/adore-river...
| darksaints wrote:
| That's a pretty strained comparison. Lenin was talking about
| the economic struggle for dominance between two mutually
| exclusive ideologies, of which only one could win. There was no
| implication of being branded with an epithet for political
| dominance.
| aidenn0 wrote:
| To be fair, there was only one item on the list of
| microagressions that didn't have at least 1/5 of all african-
| americans classify it as something other than "not offensive"
| (not sure what the other options are).
|
| If a black person is answering "Is this offensive to me" and the
| white person is answering "Is this offensive to some black
| people" the numbers make total sense.
| listless wrote:
| I've often heard the argument that we need to change all GitHub
| repos from master to main because master has etymological origins
| in the concept of slavery, and is therefore a racist term. But
| I've always heard this argument made by white people. I wonder
| what percentage of black people working in technology find the
| term so offensive that it should be changed in every context.
| onion2k wrote:
| _But I've always heard this argument made by white people._
|
| Are you actively seeking a diverse range of people to listen
| to? The majority of prominent people in tech are white men, so
| it's not particularly likely you'll hear non-white people's
| opinions unless you actually seek them out.
| akomtu wrote:
| The noise about master branches is nothing because one day the
| woke types will discover the White House in DC.
| knicholes wrote:
| Or any executive title that starts with "chief."
| eesmith wrote:
| What percentage would be enough for you to support the change?
|
| BTW, the argument isn't as simple as "because master has
| etymological origins in the concept of slavery" because
| "master" has many varied meanings (see
| https://www.etymonline.com/word/master ), the slavery one was
| not the first, and at most only a tiny fringe want to change
| terms like "master's degree" or "master mariner" to something
| else.
| gunfighthacksaw wrote:
| I think changing master/slave terminology is justified, but to
| me master branch suggests something like master key or master
| prints. That which is the superior and definitive example of
| the collection from which it comes.
| [deleted]
| nlitened wrote:
| Shouldn't universities rename master's degree programs as
| well?
| avereveard wrote:
| That comes from master/pupil
| MrStonedOne wrote:
| Master apprentice is the better analogy.
|
| as once a branch is merged, it effectively becomes the
| master.
| Retric wrote:
| I am fine replacing Master/Slave terminology where it shows
| up. I just think Master alone is fine just like Masters
| degree, Master craftsman, Master/Apprentice, Master of
| ceremonies, hell Master brand hand tools.
| [deleted]
| adamrezich wrote:
| see how quickly that slope gets slippery?
| okamiueru wrote:
| It's virtue signaling. That use of "master" is just tiny
| compared to all other uses in history. "Master record", "master
| of science", "master artisan". Should conductors no longer be
| called maestros? It's dumb, and should be ridiculed, if not
| called out for the deliberate harm of detracting from the real
| issue of institutionalised racism. If you feel something should
| be done, _this isn 't it_, and we shouldn't get to feel better
| by renaming a git branch.
| silicon2401 wrote:
| > detracting from the real issue of institutionalised racism
|
| that just gets you demonized too, for not falling in line
| 100%. any questioning of the narrative means you must be
| racist yourself
| oftenwrong wrote:
| There's a significant difference when "master" being used in
| contrast to "slave", such as with PATA drives.
|
| The term "master" as used in git is thought to be derived
| from master-slave terminology by way of it borrowing the term
| from bitkeeper:
|
| https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-
| list/2019-May/...
| flyingcircus3 wrote:
| I've literally never seen/heard the phrase "virtue signaling"
| be used in a context that actually persuaded me to agree with
| the user of said phrase. It's just a magical shibboleth that
| is completely unprovable.
| hdjjhhvvhga wrote:
| Maybe because the most prominent virtue signalers today are
| not people, but corporations.
| jessaustin wrote:
| I find the use of that phrase to be a powerful argument for
| flipping the bozo bit.
| damagednoob wrote:
| I find the same thing for 'dog whistle'. When people tell
| you who they are, believe them except I can read their
| minds and this is their actual intent.
| jessaustin wrote:
| Believe what people tell me? No thank you; I was born at
| night but not _last_ night. I prefer to observe what
| people do.
| AnimalMuppet wrote:
| That's still "them telling you who they are".
| cronix wrote:
| They're doing it in the housing industry. "Master bedroom" is
| going away.
|
| https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/05/realestate/master-bedroom...
|
| L'oreal is stopping using the term "whitening" and "fair" in
| their products.
|
| https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/27/business/loreal-removes-word-...
|
| Don't forget "master/slave" used in general computing terms,
| beyond "git branches."
|
| https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/13/technology/racist-compute...
|
| It's happening in the wine industry.
|
| > The Court of Master Sommeliers, which "sets the global
| standard of excellence for beverage service within the
| hospitality industry," will stop using the term "master
| sommelier."
|
| We must purge those words from all of our vocabulary in all
| contexts, for they can only mean one thing.
| rcoveson wrote:
| Chess colors and the rules around them will probably change
| at some point. What's worse is that people will act like the
| prospect is _utterly ridiculous_ while the idea is in its
| infancy. Then, after FIDE or some other Chess organization
| release a statement about planned changes, people 's tune
| will change to "It's inconvenient but if it helps even one
| more Black person feel good about playing Chess then it was
| worth it".
|
| I'm already starting to believe it. Do we really play a game
| with white and black pieces where white always goes first?
| Where black loses more games than white? Not everybody knows
| the history of Chess. To some new players, especially from
| less privileged groups, it may seem like just another example
| of leftover oppression. Even to those who know that the
| history of the colors predates white European enslavement of
| black Africans, it nonetheless serves as a painful reminder
| due to the meanings of those things in a modern context.
| jessaustin wrote:
| _...the history of the colors predates slavery..._
|
| This is an interesting claim. My Bible has numerous
| instances of slavery, and none of chess.
| nathanlied wrote:
| When "slavery" is mentioned in this context (wrt.
| black/white), it's reasonable to assume the person means
| it predates the Atlantic slave trade, which was not the
| only form of slavery, but it was the largest (and most
| visible) form of slavery involving predominantly white
| people owning predominantly brown people.
|
| I make no claim over the validity of "white going first"
| predating the Atlantic slave trade, however. I simply
| don't know.
| rcoveson wrote:
| Yes, thank you very much. Fixed.
| deanCommie wrote:
| When you're a minority in any space, it's dangerous to speak
| about about ways that you are discriminated against. People
| think that you are trying to come up with excuses for not
| delivering value. And then you start being treated like a
| token. Nobody wants that
|
| Even if people don't say that/think that, you yourself want to
| prove yourself on merits - isn't that the best way to find
| racism/sexism/ism? Show that it would be ridiculous to be
| discriminated against.
|
| My experience with women engineers is that most want to
| dedicate their time to first earning their credibility and only
| THEN get involved in any D&I efforts.
|
| That's why it's unfair to ask women to be the advocates for
| gender parity, to ask black people to advocate for more
| inclusive racial language, etc. The most meaningful change
| comes from within, from people who DON'T have skin in the game.
|
| Yes, mistakes can happen: See the whole LatinX debaucle, which
| Latino/a people think is idiotic. But it doesn't negate the
| responsibility of white people to help fix past injustices.
|
| Lastly, the bar for fixing past injustices isn't "is the term
| so offensive that it should be changed in every context". It's
| "Is the term offensive enough that it wouldn't be INTRODUCED
| today?". Yes, this requires more effort. But that's the only
| way to fix injustice - it's not to stop from now on, it's also
| go back and fix past problems.
|
| Malcolm X:
|
| > "I will never say that progress is being made. If you stick a
| knife in my back nine inches and pull it out six inches,
| there's no progress. If you pull it all the way out, that's not
| progress. The progress is healing the wound that the blow made.
| And they haven't even begun to pull the knife out, much less
| heal the wound. They won't even admit the knife is there."
| wolverine876 wrote:
| Great perspective, and I'll add that:
|
| > you yourself want to prove yourself on merits
|
| Also, like every other human, you want to fit in. Not only is
| it a fundamental human instinct (think of the awful things
| people do in order to fit in), it's necessary for your day at
| work, your current job, and your career. You can be mediocre
| at your job and work for a long time. But we know what
| happens to troublemakers or whistle-blowers.
|
| > Lastly, the bar for fixing past injustices isn't "is the
| term so offensive that it should be changed in every
| context". It's "Is the term offensive enough that it wouldn't
| be INTRODUCED today?".
|
| Excellent idea, and I will use it.
|
| > Yes, mistakes can happen: See the whole LatinX debaucle,
| which Latino/a people think is idiotic.
|
| If true, it's mostly harmless to err on the side of being
| respectful. Erring on the side of discrimination does a lot
| of harm.
| golemiprague wrote:
| That's your interpretation, there is no proof for it, it
| might be that they just don't feel any discrimination or they
| don't want your coddling but rather want to compete and prove
| themselves even if there is discrimination. I don't think any
| group of people succeeded by getting coddled, it is
| humiliating and crippling. What the Americans are doing now
| to their black community is a disaster, you guys are just
| destroying them even further with all your "help", it is not
| wonder they can't improve their situation unlike many other
| dark skin groups in America which seems to do well even with
| all the "racism".
| avereveard wrote:
| > the responsibility of white people to help fix past
| injustices
|
| Keep hearing that, but it's bullshit, who are the "white
| people"? Suddenly, and conveniently, cultures disappear,
| everyone gets bunched together in the "guilty bucket" and
| extorted penance for things a tiny fraction of specific
| people within specific cultures are responsible.
|
| Justice is built on the principle of individual
| responsibility for a reason, collective punishments don't
| have a place in just society.
|
| But I'll indulge the thought that white owe collectively some
| kind of reparations... So, what's the amount, and to whom do
| I pay to be free of the burden? Do I get a certificate after
| I pay? After wich percentage of payment from the whites can
| we start removing poc subsidies in job and education?
|
| People keep towing the "white responsibility" line but
| somehow never talk of what happens after, I wonder why.
| deanCommie wrote:
| > who are the "white people"?
|
| I think I know what you're getting at - these concepts
| evolved over time. Irish and Italians didn't used to be
| considered "white". They do now.
|
| But the answer is statistics. Broadly speaking, in western
| society, "White people" are the ones that have privilege to
| be not discriminated against in the court system, with
| housing, with job applications, with police brutality, etc.
|
| We are the ones that get treated as the "default". This is
| why "white-passing" is a term that exists.
|
| > Justice is built on the principle of individual
| responsibility for a reason, collective punishments don't
| have a place in just society.
|
| That's the whole point - we still do have collective
| punishments that need to be negated. Black people DO get
| disproportionately higher prison sentences for the same
| crimes. Black people DO experience disproportionately more
| police brutality for the same behaviour. etc.
|
| > But I'll indulge the thought that white owe collectively
| some kind of reparations... So, what's the amount, and to
| whom do I pay to be free of the burden? Do I get a
| certificate after I pay? After wich percentage of payment
| from the whites can we start removing poc subsidies in job
| and education?
|
| Since I didn't bring up actual financial reparations, let's
| leave that discussion for another day.
|
| Fixing injustices and issues of privilege doesn't require
| those with privilege to pay anything. For those used to
| privilege equality can feel like oppression, but it doesn't
| have to.
|
| The goal is to build society based on merit, not racial
| assumptions. When black people get beat by the police the
| same amount as white people, that's when we're done, for
| example.
|
| Your white responsibility for example, is that when you
| hear about an instance of police brutality is not to have
| the first question you ask be "What did the victim do to
| deserve it?"
| throwawayQL9 wrote:
| > Irish and Italians didn't used to be considered
| "white".
|
| Got a cite that fair-skin Irish and Italians were ever
| considered "not white" (not "not English", but "not
| white")?
|
| > Broadly speaking, in western society, "White people"
| are the ones that have privilege to be not discriminated
| against in the court system, with housing, with job
| applications, with police brutality, etc.
|
| So now "white" is anyone who gets affirmative action?
|
| > Black people DO get disproportionately higher prison
| sentences for the same crimes. Black people DO experience
| disproportionately more police brutality for the same
| behaviour. etc.
|
| Blacks commit half of all murders but they are only a
| third of those killed by the police.
| avereveard wrote:
| Police brutality is something so American-centered it
| just further highlights the problem of bunching "whites"
| together.
| gherkinnn wrote:
| Because just like shaming the use of drinking straws, it's a
| low effort (and in my view mostly inconsequential or even
| misguided) change that gives you a feeling of moral
| superiority.
|
| Actual sacrifices are hard and uncomfortable. Who wants that?
| BurningFrog wrote:
| I think of many of those things are "tribal markers".
|
| By publicly taking a stand for/against certain things, you
| show you're a loyal member of the Blue Tribe.
|
| One important thing about that is that the weirder the stance
| is, the stronger the loyalty signal is.
|
| Saying something borderline idiotic that the Tribe likes,
| shows you're ready to publicly humiliate yourself for the
| tribe, which earns extra credit.
|
| I'm not at all saying this is the only thing in play here,
| but once you realize this is a "thing", it makes some crazy
| things seem less crazy.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| > Actual sacrifices are hard and uncomfortable.
|
| Can't we do both the hard and easy? Neither precludes the
| other. How are you helping by obstructing either?
|
| > gives you a feeling of moral superiority
|
| Can you give evidence of that being the motive? It's too easy
| to smear people with it. Maybe you are motivated by moral
| superiority, maybe I am.
| kyleee wrote:
| > Can't we do both the hard and easy? Neither precludes the
| other. How are you helping by obstructing either?
|
| Probably not? That would assume people have infinite time
| and energy, and unlimited political and social capital to
| urge other people and organizations to change, which I
| don't think is true
| gm3dmo wrote:
| Master/journeyman/apprentice were the terms in the middle ages
| when your parents sold you to master as indentured labour for a
| 7 year term. I'm of the mind that that was a form of slavery.
|
| Peter Grimes in the George Crabbe poem murders apprentices and
| get off Scot free until an eventual comeuppance.
| [deleted]
| wolverine876 wrote:
| It's important to consider the complication that there are few
| black people in technology who you could ask. Inevitably, most
| people talking about Github are white.
| hpoe wrote:
| My brother in law is black and in Tech, and not African
| American just straight up African. He doesn't have an issue
| with it.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| One example of hearsay from someone somebody on a message
| board knows is not evidence, and it doesn't change my
| point: If people are talking about Github, they probably
| are white.
| adamrezich wrote:
| "everyone should make this change to their language
| because it's offensive to $MINORITY"
|
| "but you, and pretty much everyone else espousing this,
| aren't $MINORITY, why do you feel the need to speak on
| their behalf?"
|
| "well there aren't a lot of $MINORITY in this industry,
| and there's all sorts of reasons why minorities don't
| want to speak up about something like this because of
| discrimination in their workplace"
|
| "ok here's a $MINORITY I know personally, he doesn't have
| a problem with it"
|
| "that's just anecdotal evidence and should thus be
| disregarded"
|
| infantilizing minorities will never not be disgusting
| wolverine876 wrote:
| How did the GP infantilize anyone? The GGP was simply not
| evidence.
| adamrezich wrote:
| if someone is advocating for changing language for
| everyone to protect the feelings of $MINORITY, without
| actually knowing any $MINORITY that objects to said
| language (or being one themselves), then disregards
| anecdotal instances of $MINORITY _not_ objecting to said
| language, then the result is a belief that you know what
| changes to society should be made _on behalf of_
| $MINORITY, thus infantilizing them, portraying them as
| someone who can 't speak up for themselves and portraying
| yourself as someone who knows better than $MINORITY what
| is best for $MINORITY.
| JoeAltmaier wrote:
| Everybody should speak their mind about correct behavior.
| I see somebody rob an old lady, I don't 'speak on her
| behalf' when objecting to the robbery.
|
| It's funny how the objections to talking about racism,
| always center around silencing the discussion.
| dang wrote:
| Would you please stop posting in the flamewar style to
| HN? You've done it a lot, and it's not what this site is
| for. This thread may not be great but your comments are
| standing out as more flamey than the rest. This is the
| opposite of how we want comments to go here.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
|
| p.s. please also don't call names, like you did at the
| end here. That's also against the site guidelines.
| [deleted]
| moth-fuzz wrote:
| The key phrase is identity politics - I hope internet discourse
| begins to move away from this framework, but as of now politics
| is entirely focused on the nouns - who, what, when. The immutable
| states of ones' person. The answer is to move to a verb-based
| politics: what does this person do? What have they done? What do
| they say? What do they think? Are the dialectics good? Is the
| methodology sound? Does it make _sense_? Does it _help_? Does it
| _hurt_?
|
| People will say "listen to black people" while simultaneously
| dehumanizing all black people into a monolithic and tokenized
| opinion-vessel. I personally know black people, gay people, trans
| people, disabled people, who are _exhausted_ of being that
| vessel. Of being a walking textbook for other people to memorize.
| The truth is that black people, and all people of color, are
| diverse culturally, emotionally, and intellectually and in order
| to be a good ally you have to not only listen to All of them, as
| well as your own heart, and you must use your critical thinking
| skills to determine what you personally think is correct - and
| act on it. You must be active and competent, and you must not
| regurgitate. At the end of the day there will be black people who
| agree with you and black people who disagree with you, but you
| can hope your efforts at activism will help both groups
| regardless.
| chme wrote:
| > People will say "listen to black people" while simultaneously
| dehumanizing all black people into a monolithic and tokenized
| opinion-vessel. I personally know black people, gay people,
| trans people, disabled people, who are exhausted of being that
| vessel.
|
| Well everyone loves their boxes, don't they?
|
| It's so neat and easy to put everyone in one of those and
| finding the right box for someone just requires a glance at
| them or maybe some exchanged words. And suddenly all that
| persons problems and motivations are understood, and it is
| known wherever what they say should be praised or ignored.
| AnimalMuppet wrote:
| When you say it that way, it sounds really racist.
| akomtu wrote:
| Identity politics is a very convenient power framework. Dealing
| with a nation of billion intelligent individuals is an arduous
| task. Instead, they could be boxed into 5-6 groups, every group
| gets assigned viewpoints that its members must adhere to, and
| suddenly you only need to deal with 5-6 individuals. We call it
| abstraction and encapsulation in software. The only problem is
| enforcing the in-group behavior, but it turns out groups can do
| it themselves: the "crab mentality" makes people pull down
| anyone who tries to climb out of the box. This arrangement of
| 5-6 boxes with crabs is very stable, but whether one can
| downgrade a well established and intelligent society into this
| state is a big open question.
| corey_moncure wrote:
| > as of now politics is entirely focused on the nouns - who,
| what, when. The immutable states of ones' person. The answer is
| to move to a verb-based politics: what does this person do?
|
| A sociology teacher I had at UMich said a lot of things I
| disagreed with but one idea that I'll never forget is that
| prior to the 20th Century, there were no homosexuals. Humans
| haven't changed- there were homosexual _acts_ , which
| individuals may have practiced at varying levels according to
| the time and place in history. But it wasn't something that
| came to define one's identity until very recently in history.
| krapp wrote:
| related: "Shakespeare needs more gay[0]."
|
| [0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZWMTGF1pNw
| clipradiowallet wrote:
| The loudest voice gets to define what things mean. In other
| cases, the voice that is able to silence and/or censor other
| voices gets to make those calls.
| adamrezich wrote:
| actually it's the loudest voice _with the best appeal to
| emotion_ that gets to define what things mean.
| OrvalWintermute wrote:
| I'd contend that BigTech commissars currently get to define it,
| as they also define volume of a voice. They are more powerful
| than governments, and due to their downstream effects, they can
| bully even BigMedia.
| krapp wrote:
| Literally nothing in your comment is true.
| OrvalWintermute wrote:
| The evidence is that a US President [1], however unpopular,
| and a US Senator [2], and multiple Congressmen/women have
| been censored [3] , and numerous other people, or messaging
| attached to their communications [4] . In some cases,
| unpopular causes, or causes contrary to a BigTech interest
| have been censored [5]. At the same time, certain
| terrorists have been permitted to distribute their
| messaging unhampered [6]. Although a national platform can
| be an issue, that hasn't stopped BigTech from stooping down
| to censor unpopular local govt [7] .
|
| In some cases, governments have colluded with BigTech to
| censor their political rivals [8] or to flag content that a
| state government found undesirable [9]
|
| Please provide your evidence to the contrary to disprove
| the truth of it.
|
| [1] https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/twitter-
| censors-twee...
|
| [2] https://www.paul.senate.gov/news/dr-rand-paul-releases-
| video...
|
| [3] https://thehill.com/opinion/cybersecurity/397047-big-
| techs-c...
|
| [4] https://infogalactic.com/info/List_of_people_censored_b
| y_Twi...
|
| [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_by_Google
|
| [6] https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/
| 01/mo...
|
| [7] https://youtubecensorship.com/2021-08-12-15-times-big-
| tech-c...
|
| [8] https://www.dailysignal.com/2021/07/21/biden-white-
| house-adm...
|
| [9] https://survivalmagazine.org/news/huge-dr-shiva-
| discovers-ex...
| sebow wrote:
| I would also add that sometimes the voice that "sounds the most
| reasonable" while requiring low cognitive reasoning.(Which in
| turn, turns into your 'loudest voice'). Notice that this means
| that that voice might not be correct, it's just that often
| people don't bother with good explanations of what/when/etc.,
| they just whats something that validates their own view(which
| sadly often times leads to a negative outcome, especially when
| that view has been influenced before).
| kleer001 wrote:
| I would say the loudest voices and it doesn't have to be very
| many of them at that.
| a_conservative wrote:
| There seems to be a recursive aspect to this. Accusations of
| racism are used to silence (censor) voices.
|
| From the article:
|
| Charges of "racism," for instance, are primarily deployed
| against the political opponents of upwardly-mobile, highly-
| educated progressive white people. Even to the point of
| branding prominent black or brown dissenters as race-traitors
| (despite the reality that, on average, blacks and Hispanics
| tend to be significantly more socially conservative and
| religious than whites).
| avereveard wrote:
| > Charges of "racism," for instance, are primarily deployed
| against the political opponents of upwardly-mobile, highly-
| educated progressive white people.
|
| Yep. Black people get to define our vocabulary. Internet
| throws a fit if someone squints their eyes and talk with a
| Asian accent.
|
| But go "bippity boppity mamma mia" gesticulating heavily, and
| everyone laughs.
| myWindoonn wrote:
| Racism is when people believe falsehoods about genetics and
| heritability, particularly when they believe that humans form
| multiple races. It's that simple. We should require sociologists
| to take an introductory course in molecular biology so that they
| grok this part of human nature.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| > An important first step is to actually listen to people of
| color about their priorities and concerns ...
|
| I couldn't agree more, and it demonstrates what is (IMHO) the
| core problem:
|
| Q: Why are a bunch of mostly white people talking to each other
| about the definition of racism here on HN? It is somewhat absurd:
| If the topic was federated authentication, I would shut up and
| let the people who have direct experience and expertise with
| federated authentication talk.
|
| But there aren't many African-American or Hispanic people here -
| or at our workplaces, or in our social lives. (Yes, there are
| exceptions, but generally it's true for the HN audience.) We
| don't know because we don't have access to people who have direct
| experience and expertise (you wouldn't make any serious decision
| with that level of knowledge, don't try to do it here). That's
| how many issues well-known in minority communities stay hidden or
| are easily dismissed by white people - they are not in our realm
| of experience. We don't come to work and have a coworker upset
| because their child was abused by police, or can't follow their
| dream career because of racism, etc.
|
| I've made a point of getting outside the 'white experience
| bubble' (my term). I couldn't recommend it more - it is
| perspective-shifting, mind-altering. That bubble, once most of my
| universe, now seems like a small bizarro-world in the much wider
| universe of reality. It's not hard: Talk to African-Americans -
| not as 'Black People' but just as people, with their own
| experiences, etc. _Essential: Shut up and listen; don 't agree,
| disagree, prompt, cross-examine; just give people space; you know
| as much about racism as I know about federated authentication._
| Also, look around and notice when, in a country that is ~60%
| white, your environment is 99% white, and try to find somewhat
| more diverse spaces. When a bunch of white people start trying to
| derogate racism, laugh.
|
| To circle back to the article: One way to address racism (and
| that bubble) is to create environments where minority people feel
| welcome. Changing some words and customs is a cheap, easy way to
| do it, even if it's (inevitably) imperfect.
| uniqueid wrote:
| One approach might be to argue that relatively well-off and
| highly-educated liberal whites -- by virtue of their college
| education and higher rates of consumption of 'woke' content in
| the media, online, etc. -- simply understand the reality and
| dynamics of racism better than the average black or Hispanic. I
| would strongly advise against anyone taking a stand on that hill.
|
| I'd advise against that _wording_ , which I think the author
| tailors to sound as preposterous and obnoxious as possible.
| gm3dmo wrote:
| s/woke/being nicer to people/g
| wolverine876 wrote:
| How would you word it?
| uniqueid wrote:
| The average person, of _any_ so-called 'race', doesn't know
| much history, economics, law, philosophy or sociology.
|
| So it's not ridiculous to claim that a highly-educated person
| can perceive actual cases of racism that the victim, if
| lower-educated, cannot.
|
| First-hand experience is powerful in some situations, but
| worthless in others. If it weren't, diabetics wouldn't need
| doctors.
| jessaustin wrote:
| _...one of the very worst charges that can be leveled against
| someone - especially a white person - is to accuse them of being
| racist._
|
| This won't be true no matter how many times you repeat it. "As a
| white person", I have been accused of racism. My response was to
| apologize and attempt to do better in future. I have largely been
| successful in those better attempts. When I have fallen short, I
| have apologized again.
|
| At no point have I been fired or done prison time for my
| momentary racist episodes.
|
| TFA seems like a ridiculous attempt to incite the problem it
| poses as lamenting. Flagged.
| kyleee wrote:
| You've had momentary racist episodes? Does that happen
| frequently?
| jessaustin wrote:
| Yes that was explained in the immediately preceding
| paragraph: _" As a white person", I have been accused of
| racism._ Off the top of my head, I can think of three
| instances over the course of my life; there may have been
| others.
| ZeroGravitas wrote:
| Yeah, I know a white person and he says he hates it when people
| like this make him out to be the victim.
|
| It's just virtue signalling, pretending you care about white
| people being called racist when really most white people just
| want them to shut up about it all instead of forcing them into
| victimhod.
| phkahler wrote:
| >> Yet, white college students and graduates were significantly
| more likely than the average black or Hispanic respondent to
| brand these statements as "offensive." This effect was especially
| pronounced among white highly-educated respondents who identified
| with the left.
|
| This is what is called Cancel Culture. It is really not OK to be
| offended on behalf of someone else. When people do this, they are
| infantilizing (is that a word?) the supposedly offended and some
| of them don't like _that_ behavior.
|
| But go ahead and change your git repository to "main" instead of
| "master" just in case someone thinks it's some kind of slavery
| reference (everyone will update all their documentation and
| tutorials right?). Next we can work on your cars brakes (master
| cylinder), anything that involved master templates, certain golf
| tournaments, and what on earth are we going to do with all those
| masters degrees?
| darksaints wrote:
| > This is what is called Cancel Culture. It is really not OK to
| be offended on behalf of someone else. When people do this,
| they are infantilizing (is that a word?) the supposedly
| offended and some of them don't like that behavior.
|
| The Cancel Culture term is one that is thrown around as if it
| is only something that leftists do. And with respect to
| projecting offense to perceived racism, the left certainly has
| that market covered. But what about projecting offense to
| veterans when someone takes a knee to the national anthem?
|
| The rush to define Cancel Culture is just as politically
| motivated and politically applied as the rush to define racism.
| f154hfds wrote:
| My employer recently required me to take a training course on
| privilege, allyship, implicit bias and intersectionality. It was
| something like 2 hours total spread over 4 trainings.
|
| I found it hard to directly criticize anything they said as the
| majority of it was common sense and anything objectionable wasn't
| so egregiously objectionable to warrant any real complaint from
| me (not that they gave me the option, feedback in the series was
| suspiciously absent).
|
| The main problem with it as mentioned in the article is the
| incessant fixation on victimhood. I feel that our culture's
| relationship to victimhood is no better than the ancients but
| just in the opposite extreme. Before there were precious few
| 'celebrated' victims (victims lifted up and supported by society)
| - they mostly lived and died in obscurity perhaps not even
| knowing the nature of their victimhood.
|
| Now we want to explore each person's past and expose anything
| that could possibly be construed as oppression/victimhood and
| expose it to the world. We end up with the other type of error:
| people presented as victims who aren't (relative to our
| perception, of course victimhood is on a spectrum).
|
| No one wants a society full of victims, but we equally can't have
| a society organized via victim hierarchy (intersectionality).
| bassman9000 wrote:
| > My employer recently required me
|
| Did everyone at the company take it?
| f154hfds wrote:
| As far as I know, it is part of a long-term D&I initiative
| which has much more aspects to it. For example, your review
| weights your D&I performance as important as your technical
| performance.
| AnimalMuppet wrote:
| To me, this screams that you are in an organization where
| technical performance is not critical to the success of the
| organization.
|
| I mean, look, I don't want to return to the days where if
| you were technically good, you could be a sexist jerk or a
| racist jerk or just generally a jerk. I don't want to work
| in that kind of an organization. But... equal weighting?
| Your organization isn't fighting for its life on technical
| merit, I suspect...
| wolverine876 wrote:
| > The main problem with it as mentioned in the article is the
| incessant fixation on victimhood.
|
| Could you give examples? It's hard to understand what you mean.
| Everyone objects to 'victimhood'; the significance is in the
| actual events.
| javajosh wrote:
| _> Everyone objects to 'victimhood'_
|
| Um, what? Victimhood has become THE status symbol of the
| left. If you aren't a victim you're an abuser, so anyone
| looking for status reaches for whatever victimhood they can
| get.
|
| Victimhood is also a potent weapon - if anyone disagrees with
| you, you can claim they are oppressing you, denying your
| victimhood, gaslighting you, and so on.
|
| Victimhood is the ultimate passive aggressive weapon in a
| culture that has seemingly forgotten that _everyone lies_.
| flyingcircus3 wrote:
| Is it the left that endlessly wines about cancel culture,
| and social media taking away their platform? I could have
| sworn it was a different group...
| f154hfds wrote:
| There's nothing wrong with fixation on victimhood that
| actually exists: one person wronging another begets an
| oppressor and a victim. However, a fixation on victimhood to
| the extreme can lead to error with negative consequences.
|
| For example, many forms of microaggressions mentioned in the
| article do not (in my opinion) lead to victimhood. To say
| otherwise runs the risk of making victims that don't exist.
| Being offended for example does not _necessarily_ make you
| into a victim.
| jessaustin wrote:
| One solution to this dilemma is to refuse to consider oneself
| to be a victim, while simultaneously completely ignoring
| whether other people make the same refusal.
| taeric wrote:
| Oddly, this reminds me of the trope in a lot of fiction where
| the main protagonist has a super twisted back story.
|
| It is super tiring and doesn't seem to actually be necessary or
| informative.
| akomtu wrote:
| I've been to one of such trainings that demonstrated what we
| would call "a struggle session" (using the Mao's terminology).
| Basically, a few professional "victims" told sorrow stories and
| explained how they could improve their behavior in the future.
| The stories were bs and the "victims" were millionaires, but
| what impressed me was the sad and twisted expressions on their
| faces. The face expressions were genuine. While watching the
| show, I was thinking that they looked like "inversed saints":
| instead of teaching compassion and how attachment to emotions
| and material things causes misery, they teach to fixate on low-
| type emotions and minor physical traits and while doing so they
| demonstrate the mysereble psychological state they've inflicted
| on themselves.
| hdjjhhvvhga wrote:
| Out of curiosity: did they actually prefixed 'privilege' with
| 'white' during the training just like online activists do?
| Because this one of these imposing Americanisms which has no
| relation to reality whatsoever in some other parts of the
| world, like in Russia, for example.
| f154hfds wrote:
| To their credit they did not.
| [deleted]
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-08-20 23:01 UTC)