On 2025-07-17 09:50:09, Jonathan Kamens wrote: > Whether there can be racism against white people is an incredibly complex > question with a ton of baggage, about which many PhD dissertations have been > written and I'm sure many more will be. > > This particular discussion we are engaged in here is hard enough without > going down this particular rabbit-hole. It's off-topic for this list, and > it's unlikely that anybody's mind will be changed on this particular issue > by a discussion here. So can we please, just… not get into it any further > here?
No, it's not off-topic, or not entirely. The post I replied to was saying "it's fine to be racist against white people". Is this the project's stance? I really don't think the project should be promoting any kind of racism, and I want that clearly said. And not simply "eh, it's not important enough to talk about, let's let it slide". If we're against racism, we should be very clear about it. I do not want to donate any time of mine toward racism of any kind. I don't want to change anyones mind, I want to make sure the project's stance is clear and without doubt on what "racism" is, if we're against racism. iustin > On 7/17/25 9:42 AM, Iustin Pop wrote: > > On 2025-07-17 11:45:44, Antoine Le Gonidec wrote: > > > Le Wed, Jul 16, 2025 at 07:30:46PM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez a écrit : > > > > I have a very hard time understanding how in two adjacent paragraphs you > > > > can say both "Sexism, racism and such are not, never were, and can not > > > > be funny." and also "making fun of cis-het white males can be offensive, > > > > and it’s OK." You sound like a hypocrite. > > > > > > > > So, are sexism, racism and such *never* OK, or are they only OK when > > > > they're directed at whatever group or groups you happen to think it is > > > > acceptable to oppress? Society has been there before (some group decides > > > > that another group should be oppressed, marginalized, exploited, > > > > eradicated, or whatever) and the results were not good. It doesn't make > > > > sense for you to claim a commitment to non-oppression and then make > > > > allowance for it at the same time. > > > I get where the confusion is coming from. I am indeed saying that > > > sexism, racism, etc. are never OK. But that jokes targeted at the > > > dominant group are not racism or sexism. > > > > > > There is no such thing, in our current society, as anti-white racism or > > > anti-male sexism. Because these -ism are about enforcing an oppression, > > > and there is, by definition, no oppression happening against the > > > dominant group. > > This is the most wrong stance to have on racism and sexism. There can be > > racism against any person, and sexism against any person. If you say > > "there can't be racism against X", what you're actually doing is being > > racist against all X. > > > > If we don't want to promote racism, then let's acknowledge that racism > > itself > > is bad, not racism against Y. Otherwise you're just trying to switch > > from racism against Y to racism against X. > > > > very surprised, > > iustin > >
