4 ms·
You're ignoring the parallel argument I made to yours (not that I believe it, but I'm saying it makes as much sense as yours), which would suggest the white man
by brighteyes 11y ago
You're ignoring the parallel argument I made to yours (not that I believe it, but I'm saying it makes as much sense as yours), which would suggest the white man is more qualified.
Anyhow, in practice, I doubt it matters: most applicants to such positions are likely not white men anyhow. So the racism inherent in such statements as "white folks are not suitable for this role" is not only wrong, it is also unnecessary.
- mjbh7k 11y agoAgain, no one ever said white people are not suitable for this role or can't be involved in any way. This is the third time I've pointed this out. No one is saying white people can't be empathetic, or thoughtful, or innovative when it comes to topics of race. It's just that people of color are even more qualified to lead these programs as they have first hand experience existing in an exceptionally racist system. White people are already in charge of everything, they don't also need to be in charge of diversity. That's exactly why these positions are being created in the first place.
- brighteyes 11y agoYou're refuting something I didn't say. What I did say was an argument directly against > It's just that people of color are even more qualified which you're ignoring again. Is it because the argument wasn't clear? Should I try again?
- malandrew 11y agoI made your point clearer with my devil's advocate reply. I too am curious about the answer.