Having looked into it further, I think you guys have a point.
I still maintain that the terms are intended to conjure up an image of a profiteer from racial strife or poverty.
However, I am now in agreement that the terms are more apt to be applied to blacks than they are to comparably situated whites.
I’m happy to leave it at that. I appreciate your reasonableness in considering the other side of the argument.
Me too. It is good when we can agree on something.
Yes, my tenderness is so much it spilled out into the Pit.
This is definitely something I think about.
I’m a straight white guy with pretty lefty views. It’s not so much a desire to be an ally of whoever as it is a desire to be a decent and fair human being, and I see the best way to do that, in many cases, is to talk smack about bigotry.
I’m not subjected to much bigotry, and when I am, it’s pretty freakin’ tolerable (people who think I got hired as a teacher due to pro-male affirmative action–boo hoo, my feelingz be hurt!). I don’t really speak about much of it from experience. I rarely see explicit racism or other explicit bigotry, and when I do, I tend to handle it with less rancor than I probably should (ideally I’d chew out the bigots when it happens, but IRL I’m meek and mild-mannered).
Online, I’m aware that I love hearing the sound of my own voice, and that as a straight white male, lots of conversations are kind of structured to make that easy for me: I’m very unlikely to be told that my opinion is a result of whininess or an inability to cope or paranoia or whatever. Worst I’ll encounter is accusations that I’m white-knighting, which again: boo hoo.
So I try to pay attention to that dynamic, and when someone is speaking about an issue they have direct experience of (e.g., they’ve experienced a fair amount of racism), I pay extra attention to what they’re saying: they’re more of an expert on the subject than I am. That doesn’t mean all their opinions are right, but everything else being equal, their opinions are formed with some more substance than the opinions of folks who haven’t experienced that issue.
At the same time, I think that folks belonging to the group from which persecution stems are critical to ending the persecution from that group. The racism of white people will be ended most effectively by the voices of nonracist white people, the misogyny of men will be ended most effectively by the voices of non-misogynist men, and so on. So I figure I have a responsibility to speak out against bigots in this respect.
It’s something of a balancing act.
Indeed it is. However, around 2000, we learned that genes can be modified to be turned off or on due to environment. We also know that these modifications can alter the rate of loading of the transcriptional machinery to the promoter. Thus, gene activity can be turned off, on, reduced, or increased simply due to environment. How environmental factors - parental engagement, nutrition, social networks, education, positive role models, exposure to pollution etc etc - influence these genes is not understood. The field is new, it is called epigenetics. It is quite fascinating.
The upshot of all of this is that just because you have Gene X doesn’t mean you express Gene X. A rabbit can have a gene for a white coat turned off when that rabbit is exposed to environmental stressors (in this case, temperature). I know, crazy, right?
P.S I can post cites to the studies above if asked.
Not that it’s either here or there, but I always thought you were a girl. Now that I know you’re a guy, will you marry me? 