50 ms·

San Luis Obispo is a good case. Really expensive. None of the graduates can really live here. Also, very gentrified. The mayor recently said that she didn't

San Luis Obispo is a good case. Really expensive. None of the graduates can really live here. Also, very gentrified. The mayor recently said that she didn't want to be mayor of a town that's all old white people. Not sure how that's not incredibly racist-- but you get the point.

stcredzero 8y ago
The mayor recently said that she didn't want to be mayor of a town that's all old white people. Not sure how that's not incredibly racist Perhaps the assertion of racism isn't quite true, because to be really complete, you'd have to add ageism.
gowld 8y ago
It's not racist to not want to drive away non-white and young people.
- whatshisface 8y ago
  That's also not what they mayor said. You could interpret it charitably, but normally you have to take what public figures say and subtract some charity, because they are incentivized to hide what they're really thinking to avoid arousing opposition. After all, politicians are the ones that the phrase "being political about it" came from - their profession is to make everything they say as unobjectionable as possible while still indicating their position to their supporters.
drb91 8y ago
It’s hardly racist to express personal preference. It’s also not the same as saying “I don’t want any old white people in this town”.
- trentmb 8y ago
  > It’s hardly racist to express personal preference. I mean, it's a racist personal preference. Caring about whether the expression of it is racist seems besides the point?
  - drb91 8y ago
    I am probably being too pedantic here, as it is certainly unethical to state that publicly as a mayor. I only mean to convey there’s no such thing as an unethical thought, only unethical actions. Among other things, it is certainly socially acceptable to date or socialize mostly with people inside your own race, and I don’t know of many people who would hold this behavior to be racist. EDITS: wording, clarity. Apologies.
    - whatshisface 8y ago
      >there’s no such thing as an unethical thought, only unethical actions Gladly throwing myself in the pedantry to avoid the real discussion, the only reason we listen to other people at all is that their words are related to their thoughts and their actions. So, the reason you'd admonish someone for saying something horrible is that they indicated they were thinking something horrible, which gains status as horrible because it congruent with a mind that would do something horrible.
      - drb91 8y ago
        You’re right. If they had said something slightly different, I would be mad. It certainly isn’t behavior to condone. In a political context, it probably is racist. That said, I still do not think I would call it racism. Most of us prefer to be around people our own age when given the opportunity—for shared culture, lifestyles, etc. Is that ageist? I really don’t think that bigotry really applies here. It’s much more useful to apply solely to actions, which are easier to reason about. Discriminatory personal preference can certainly be harmful, but it seems like a distinct social phenomenon to bigotry. More pedantry... > So, the reason you'd admonish someone for saying something horrible is that they indicated they were thinking something horrible No, the reason would be fear that they would act on their thoughts, or because their speech did affect people, not that their thoughts are themselves immoral.
        whatshisface 8y ago
        Archie Bunker has a lot of leeway in his social life and armchair social theorizing, but that's mainly because it has little chance of impacting anything (although there are some who would debate that on the grounds that your social life can support your professional life). In this thread, people are upset because it was said to have come from a person who was in power, someone who might be able to realize an unsavory ideal they were harboring. Edit: To complete the pedantry, note that the end of my sentence brings it in line with the content your objection to the start of the sentence: >which gains status as horrible because it congruent with a mind that would do something horrible.
- GhostVII 8y ago
  I think most people would consider it racist if someone said that they don't want to be mayor of a town that's all old black people. If race determines whether or not you would like to govern a particular area, I think that is racist. Unless they were only worried about the age part, rather than the race part, in which case I guess it makes some sense.
hexane360 8y ago
She shouldn't have to specify "I don't want to be the mayor of a town that's all any race" because the only race that has any chance of dominating her town is non-hispanic white. Similarly, it's not heterophobic to say "I don't want to work someplace where they don't hire gay people".
DoreenMichele 8y ago
I imagine no one would be offended had it been couched in different terms as desiring a more diverse and vibrant community with more of a future. Agism or not, it's generally true that small towns with a lot of old people are typically towns in their death throes and white enclaves are typically practicing some form of racial exclusion.
pesmhey 8y ago
Punching up vs. punching down. Still a pretty mean thing to think or say.

stcredzero 8y ago

The mayor recently said that she didn't want to be mayor of a town that's all old white people. Not sure how that's not incredibly racist Perhaps the assertion of racism isn't quite true, because to be really complete, you'd have to add ageism.

gowld 8y ago

It's not racist to not want to drive away non-white and young people.

whatshisface 8y ago
That's also not what they mayor said. You could interpret it charitably, but normally you have to take what public figures say and subtract some charity, because they are incentivized to hide what they're really thinking to avoid arousing opposition. After all, politicians are the ones that the phrase "being political about it" came from - their profession is to make everything they say as unobjectionable as possible while still indicating their position to their supporters.

drb91 8y ago

It’s hardly racist to express personal preference. It’s also not the same as saying “I don’t want any old white people in this town”.

trentmb 8y ago
> It’s hardly racist to express personal preference. I mean, it's a racist personal preference. Caring about whether the expression of it is racist seems besides the point?
- drb91 8y ago
  I am probably being too pedantic here, as it is certainly unethical to state that publicly as a mayor. I only mean to convey there’s no such thing as an unethical thought, only unethical actions. Among other things, it is certainly socially acceptable to date or socialize mostly with people inside your own race, and I don’t know of many people who would hold this behavior to be racist. EDITS: wording, clarity. Apologies.
  - whatshisface 8y ago
    >there’s no such thing as an unethical thought, only unethical actions Gladly throwing myself in the pedantry to avoid the real discussion, the only reason we listen to other people at all is that their words are related to their thoughts and their actions. So, the reason you'd admonish someone for saying something horrible is that they indicated they were thinking something horrible, which gains status as horrible because it congruent with a mind that would do something horrible.
    - drb91 8y ago
      You’re right. If they had said something slightly different, I would be mad. It certainly isn’t behavior to condone. In a political context, it probably is racist. That said, I still do not think I would call it racism. Most of us prefer to be around people our own age when given the opportunity—for shared culture, lifestyles, etc. Is that ageist? I really don’t think that bigotry really applies here. It’s much more useful to apply solely to actions, which are easier to reason about. Discriminatory personal preference can certainly be harmful, but it seems like a distinct social phenomenon to bigotry. More pedantry... > So, the reason you'd admonish someone for saying something horrible is that they indicated they were thinking something horrible No, the reason would be fear that they would act on their thoughts, or because their speech did affect people, not that their thoughts are themselves immoral.
      - whatshisface 8y ago
        Archie Bunker has a lot of leeway in his social life and armchair social theorizing, but that's mainly because it has little chance of impacting anything (although there are some who would debate that on the grounds that your social life can support your professional life). In this thread, people are upset because it was said to have come from a person who was in power, someone who might be able to realize an unsavory ideal they were harboring. Edit: To complete the pedantry, note that the end of my sentence brings it in line with the content your objection to the start of the sentence: >which gains status as horrible because it congruent with a mind that would do something horrible.
GhostVII 8y ago
I think most people would consider it racist if someone said that they don't want to be mayor of a town that's all old black people. If race determines whether or not you would like to govern a particular area, I think that is racist. Unless they were only worried about the age part, rather than the race part, in which case I guess it makes some sense.

hexane360 8y ago

She shouldn't have to specify "I don't want to be the mayor of a town that's all any race" because the only race that has any chance of dominating her town is non-hispanic white. Similarly, it's not heterophobic to say "I don't want to work someplace where they don't hire gay people".

DoreenMichele 8y ago

I imagine no one would be offended had it been couched in different terms as desiring a more diverse and vibrant community with more of a future. Agism or not, it's generally true that small towns with a lot of old people are typically towns in their death throes and white enclaves are typically practicing some form of racial exclusion.

pesmhey 8y ago

Punching up vs. punching down. Still a pretty mean thing to think or say.