Pretty proud of this onehttps://twitter.com/nytmag/status/821411029250965504 …
-
-
And one of the judges kept saying "s-word" instead of "Slants" the entire time. Seriously.
-
Another thing I dug up was that all three opinions thus far (TTAB, Fed Cir, Fed Cir en banc) cite a specific incident as evidence of outrage
-
It's one in which the frontman of the band gets a speech canceled at an Asian American youth conference because of his band's name
-
A sworn statement from a steering committee member said that objections came from only one quarter, a governmental sponsor
-
The sponsor, a state commission on Asian affairs, claimed that "some state legislators" were offended by the band name
-
In 2009, the year of the incident, there were literally zero Asian American state legislators in Oregon.
-
Today, Oregon state legislature remains overwhelmingly white.
-
In subsequent years, including 2016, Tam has since spoken at the same conference without controversy
-
In other words, this source of controversy cited in every legal decision in this case? Probably came from a handful of mad white folks.
-
The entire record of this case is littered with mad white people and Asian Americans shrugging their shoulders
-
Lee v Tam highlights a lot about our society and the complexity behind how we treat slurs.
-
Depending on the-- very complex, very fraught-- context, banning a slur can either be inclusivity in action or disempowering paternalism
-
Anyways this was a fun one to write

- 3 réponses de plus
Nouvelle conversation -
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.