Vicariously Offended
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Are you for real, I said "most" because it's a vague guess and not some actual number.
But sure, let's say it's 99.919191%. Repeating of course. Better? lol
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Not my intention
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
All good
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
We both definitely agree it’s a guess
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Its a real person thing, I have had the displeasure of interacting with them.
Of course, they were young college kids who heard the term for the first time in class and were eager to prove how enlightened they were, but holy shit have I heard some hot takes. The college culture at an administrative level also plays into it, since they had an incident where one of the undergrad history professors told students it wasn't their job to educate the class on racism.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
The "I'd imagine" part of the reply might've been a bit of a tell
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
There's a Prager U video about this.
It's ok to do offensive things if you can find a representative to validate your behavior
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Cinco-De-Drinko - yeah that's a quick yoink, just so we're clear I will not be citing my sources
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
I don't think just wearing the clothes is offensive thing to begin with
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
They had an official "one-drop rule", so no need for a chart I guess. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-drop_rule
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
It doesn't.
-
Of course it was Tumblr
-
What a scrub, git gud kid
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Alright. It's entirely incidental to the point I was making so I don't feel particularly invested in defending his actions being the way he said they were.
Replace it with one of the news stories about a politician wearing blackface if it makes you feel better, or fill in what you think would work better as a racist caricature outfit depicting someone from Puerto Rico.
I stand by my original statement that if you think to yourself "I'm going to go to this Halloween party as a Puerto Rican (or any race)" you honestly shouldn't do that, regardless of what comes into your mind when you picture that race, since races aren't costumes.I'm not sure why you would think Boricua is related to food. It means a person from Puerto Rico. It's like arguing that "#new-yorkers" is about food. If it was about food, or his costume wasn't what it was, why would the picture just randomly be labeled with either this unknown food term despite no food being in the picture, or why would you go to a costume party not wearing a costume or as a generic baseball fan and post a picture of yourself labeled "Puerto Rican"? And then resign, referencing the Halloween costume amongst the list of racial insensitivities behind that choice?
The person in the article who used the term brownface is a person who actually worked with him and would presumably be able to tell if he had put on makeup to change his skin tone.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Lol, you got me there.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
I’m guessing that you’re being sarcastic so I’m just going to move on
-
Indeed. The author of the comic misrepresents it as appreciating another culture. But really it is intentionally misrepresenting or stealing a culture. Like black Cleopatra. Or Israeli Hummus.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Your freedom to worship (or not) doesn't mean you're free from the social consequences, though
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
I'm not, I even edited the prior comment I made.