Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaper16
You have to understand the substance to properly disagree with it (and your use of the word "cisgender" here means either that you don't understand THAT separate issue or you're being snarky). The general, uncritical assumption that what protesters are asking for is "batty" and "fringe" is pretty classically racist. I use that word unemotionally, not in the sense of the everlasting damnation of character that many white people think it is. Racism is whatever holds up, reinforces, or creates imbalances & inequalities of power. The idea that Concerned Student 1950's demands are seen as "fanatical" certainly reinforces the very imbalances that the students are protesting in the first place.
It is BASIC for a leader to admit that certain privileges were creating blind spots, allowing for the campus environment becoming what it is. It is an easy, common sense thing to do. It is not at all batty. That's maybe the least controversial demand on their list of demands.
Like, if this movement's demands are batty then what would a more reasonable change look like to legitimately improve the campus experiences of persons of color?
That's a rhetorical question.
|
No, calling something batty is a value judgment and not an earmark of racism. You do this shit all the time. I believe I once used the term militant as it related to something a woman said and you immediately called me a mysoginst. When I pointed out that you were being a dipshit, you blamed me for not directing you to a myriad of posts where I had used similar terminology for situations not involving women.
You just keep looking for buzzwords and ignoring all context or substance around them then you blame others because you're unwilling to do the homework.
How 'bout you stop looking for trigger words and start listening to dialogue? I didn't have a strong opinion on 1950 one way or the other UNTIL item one of their list demanded that the University President check his privilege. What a ****ing caricature; it's honest to god what South Park has spent the last 7 weeks openly satirizing. At that point it was clear we were dealing with amateur hour. You're trying to put nuance to the demand that wasn't there - you're simply backing your horse when in fact it was an obviously tone-deaf overreach. Moreover, they had to know that he wouldn't do it because they put language that carries immediate legal significance to it. They weren't interested in demands being met - they were just looking to shout at the darkness.
I've opened the floor to several around here to show me instances of 'systematic racism' at the University of Missouri. Show me things the University has done to condone racist conduct. Show me policies in place that serve to put minority students at a disadvantage.
You say I need to show you what the University needs to do to make minority student's lives more tolerable - I am saying you need to show me where the University is to blame to begin with. Remedial action can't be imposed until liability is established.
You show me actual systematic racism - policies and procedures in place and supported by the University of Missouri that actively diminish the ability of minority students to succeed - and I'll show you where the University can make changes.