see, in spanish the word for “genre” and the word for “gender” is the same: “género”. if you live in mexico and someone asks you what gender you are, you can be whatever you’re comfortable with. i’m a boy, or a girl. i’m a crime noir with a bit of spicy romance. i’m post-punk electronic music. i have transcended human perceptions of gender and am now a being of pure art
is this the real life, is this just fantasy
Yeeup, we were right. They need to take photoshop away from him.
He’s very Liefeld-esque.
I get that, I just feel like it’s weird to call it “reverse racism” if someone of color is racist. Like, obviously white people aren’t oppressed in today’s society for being white. Period. But if a POC happens to be bigoted against white people, I don’t see how it should count as “reverse” because I feel like there’s an inherent implication of one kind of racism being less bad than the other in the phrase. Maybe I’m reading to deep into it, and I really don’t want to offend anyone because I’m honestly just curious and thinking out loud
Obviously white people aren’t oppressed in today’s society for being white. Period. But if a PoC happens to be bigoted against white people, it shouldn’t be called reverse racism, it should just be called racism. Because a PoC being bigoted against white people is definitely the same as racism. Oh did I mention that white people aren’t oppressed in today’s society for being white, period?
Folks, notice how our Translator doesn’t actually address Restless Quiet’s suggestion that maybe the “reverse” prefix is used to imply it’s not as bad as “real” racism.
Sarcasm aside, a POC being bigoted against a white person is racism by any conventional definition. That is, the ones not used by social justice folks and a handful of sociologists which was invented by white people.
And don’t bother; I’m a black guy.
Oh dearie, where do I begin.
1. “Folks, notice how our Translator doesn’t actually address Restless Quiet’s suggestion that maybe the ‘reverse’ prefix is used to imply it’s not as bad as ‘real’ racism.”
I did address that. I juxtaposed the hypocrisy of his statement “white people aren’t oppressed” with his other statement “reverse racism exists.” Sweetheart, racism requires oppression. But you don’t agree with that definition, so let me tell you why you should with
2. “a POC being bigoted against a white person is racism by any conventional definition. That is, the ones not used by social justice folks and a handful of sociologists which was invented by white people.”
Oh, excuse me, I didn’t realize, as someone who is getting a formal education in social justice, that every modern sociologist and social justice activist is only “a handful.” That definition is what is taught professionally. Do you know what “professionally” is? It’s when you don’t learn from a dictionary (I am talking to you like you’re four so please imagine it that way).
Please tell me, do you go to NASA and bombard the physicists and engineers with dictionary definitions like “rocket” or “calculus”? No, of course not. Because “conventional” definitions of rocket or calculus do absolutely nothing for them in their use of calculus to build rockets. Conventional is in quotes there because by “conventional” you really mean “the loose definition I learned simply by existing as a person in society” and when the hell has any hear-say been used in a professional or academic setting?
What you are literally saying here is “Regarding any other science I’m willing to take a professional’s word for it, but social justice and sociology? Nah. I’m gonna just assume that the common person knows way more about fundamental ideas than the professionals.” Which could very well be true—but not for the reason you’re giving. It could be true because sociology was dominated by white men who are missing the great deal of empathy necessary to interpret social interactions.
However, the modern definition was created collaboratively, taking the many privileges of the kyriarchy in mind, and is as of now the most trustworthy one we’ve had. But you wouldn’t know that because “conventional” means you haven’t studied this which means you actually have no fucking idea what you’re talking about. Do you understand the amount of arrogance it takes to reach all the conclusions you’ve reached about something you don’t even research?! Speaking of putting you in your fucking place:
3. “And don’t bother; I’m a black guy.”
Ah, you’re a man. That’s why you think you’re correct about things you’ve never read up on. Well, sweetie (please imagine this as if I am talking to a four-year-old again), when you’re ready to admit that you being a Black man doesn’t excuse you from human err, we can talk.
Signed, a Black woman.
P.S. I saw your other post and I’m not answering it. You clearly cannot have anything even resembling a complex conversation with me.