I would agree that if someone is talking about the gunshot, you shouldn't bring up the sprained ankle. But I don't agree that you're just not allowed to talk about the sprained ankle. (Sorry if analogy is getting a bit stretched.)
-
-
Replying to @ESRogs @guardie188
I was talking about the gunshot and you literally brought up the sprained ankle. Thats. What. You. Did.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @FilmCritHULK @guardie188
Hmm, I interpreted it as you agreeing with someone who was saying it's not okay to talk about the sprained ankle, because gunshots exist. And I was disagreeing with that.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ESRogs @guardie188
Where in that thread does it not say it's okay to talk about the sprained ankle? that is literally his launch point. And he goes on to explain how bringing up his own plight at the cost of someone else's IS a problem, and anti-intersectionalism. You literally missed the point
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
It's a thread about how bringing up his own "sprained ankle" of his racist experiences is problematic in the discussion of the plight against women, and then, as a white guy, you said IS MY SPRAINED ANKLE NOT VALID. Which is ugly horseshit dude. Do better.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I don't think many whites' ankles were sprained by her comments, and she shouldn't be fired. Personally, my ankle was sprained by the bald-faced hypocrisy of the left in response to this issue. "Hypocrisy is fine if it's in the service of social justice." No. Gunshot into foot.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
-
"Racism targeted toward the powerful isn't racism" sends the wrong message. "We're ok with double standards as long as we are the ones making them." Let's address the low hanging fruit in Damon's causal chain and agree to not denigrate on the basis of race.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Or you can acknowledge that the whole thing is, just as it was in the civil rights movement, a conscious or subconscious manner of thinking designed to prevent oppressed groups from speaking out.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Why not both? Seriously. Some white people are using this as an opportunity to de-platform POC, and Jeong's behavior (and the tacit acceptance of it among the left) is counterproductive to genuine progressive ideals. I don't see an inherent contradiction there.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
No, it's only counterproductive to white people's ideals and staying in the position of being respected benefactors of non-white progress. Not being called out for the abusive shit.
-
-
Underlying presuppositions being: POC need racial denigration in their playbook, and the link in Damon’s causal chain of exclusionary leftist language pushing would-be left/moderates right is of no real concern. Disagree on both fronts.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.