4 ms·
There's no point in debating what "reasonable" means here, since everyone usually thinks they are reasonable. I think you've reframed the situation so that it
by wilg 7y ago
There's no point in debating what "reasonable" means here, since everyone usually thinks they are reasonable.
I think you've reframed the situation so that it no longer sounds racist. Obviously worrying about your commute isn't racist!
This is, of course, missing the point. I think the reason this bothered the memo's author is because their coworkers had a strong negative reaction to a hypothetical (and likely minor) change in their commute, but no reaction to a high-profile pattern of racially motivated murder by corrupt police officers.
Is ignoring racism racist? I think so. Is prioritizing something super trivial over racism racist? Seems close enough to me.
- will4274 7y ago> Is ignoring racism racist? I think so. Is prioritizing something super trivial over racism racist? Seems close enough to me. Assuming that silence represents malice is a classic example of totalitarian group think. And fwiw, you don't know that the co-workers cared more about the commute - they could also be deeply concerned about racism and just not want to discuss it with OP.
- wilg 7y agoI wasn’t talking about silence, I was talking about the person who was communicating their disapproval of the situation because of an extremely minor personal inconvenience. And of course we don’t know what the person cared about, we just know what they said they cared about, which is all we can go on. They were happy to discuss their political views by saying they thought the protesters were an inconvenience, so it seems pretty unlikely that they did have deep concerns about racism because that response makes no sense for someone who feels that way.