3 ms·

The problem with this retort is that of course it is okay to be white, and the details of such a campaign are what make all the difference. But the person who i

by ebg13 7y ago

The problem with this retort is that of course it is okay to be white, and the details of such a campaign are what make all the difference. But the person who isn't already with you on this will just ask "how is it not ok to be white?"

0xff00ffee 7y ago
Yeah. it takes like 20 minutes to communicate the context and how this isn't so innocuous as it looks. I've had to explain this to my aging boomer parents, and they still don't buy it. It is truly a subversive phrase because it takes control of the argument from a place that requires, IMO, a lot of basics to be explained and/or challenged... which most people don't want to sit through. It's like a self-generating mine field of arguments.
- Kaiyou 7y ago
  I don't think you can construct "It's okay to be white" as something wrong, because it's just inherently correct. It worries me, that you even try to find something wrong the the slogan.
  - 0xff00ffee 7y ago
    You have a dozen comments in this thread asking "Why is it racist" questions about obviously racist things. You're close to being reported.
  - stale2002 7y ago
    > It worries me, that you even try to find something wrong the the slogan It depends on the context of the comment. This phasing in particular was literally created by 4chan people, for the purpose of demonstrating some sort of anti SJW agenda.
  - a1369209993 7y ago
    They're interpreting it as a motte [ http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/03/all-in-all-another-brick-in-the-motte/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/03/all-in-all-another-bric... ] for the bailey "It's not okay to not be white." and enthusiaticly pursuing the usual argument. > This means people who know both terms are at constant risk of arguments of the form "You're weak-manning me!" "No, you're motte-and-baileying me!".
- miscPerson 7y ago
  I’m curious, what is that context? ...why is it “problematic” for an underrepresented group (such as in Harvard admissions), to rally around a claim it’s okay to be them? Have you ever considered that if you need to do a lot of explaining, and not even your own parents follow your logic, but the other person can persuasively summarize their argument... you might just be wrong? A question for people downvoting: Do you think I’m wrong or do you just not like what I’m saying? It seems easy to correct me about the Harvard admissions point, if I’m just factually mistaken.
  - ebg13 7y ago
    > Do you think I’m wrong or do you just not like what I’m saying? Por qué no los dos?

by ebg13 7y ago

0xff00ffee 7y ago

Yeah. it takes like 20 minutes to communicate the context and how this isn't so innocuous as it looks. I've had to explain this to my aging boomer parents, and they still don't buy it. It is truly a subversive phrase because it takes control of the argument from a place that requires, IMO, a lot of basics to be explained and/or challenged... which most people don't want to sit through. It's like a self-generating mine field of arguments.

Kaiyou 7y ago
I don't think you can construct "It's okay to be white" as something wrong, because it's just inherently correct. It worries me, that you even try to find something wrong the the slogan.
- 0xff00ffee 7y ago
  You have a dozen comments in this thread asking "Why is it racist" questions about obviously racist things. You're close to being reported.
- stale2002 7y ago
  > It worries me, that you even try to find something wrong the the slogan It depends on the context of the comment. This phasing in particular was literally created by 4chan people, for the purpose of demonstrating some sort of anti SJW agenda.
- a1369209993 7y ago
  They're interpreting it as a motte [ http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/03/all-in-all-another-brick-in-the-motte/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/03/all-in-all-another-bric... ] for the bailey "It's not okay to not be white." and enthusiaticly pursuing the usual argument. > This means people who know both terms are at constant risk of arguments of the form "You're weak-manning me!" "No, you're motte-and-baileying me!".
miscPerson 7y ago
I’m curious, what is that context? ...why is it “problematic” for an underrepresented group (such as in Harvard admissions), to rally around a claim it’s okay to be them? Have you ever considered that if you need to do a lot of explaining, and not even your own parents follow your logic, but the other person can persuasively summarize their argument... you might just be wrong? A question for people downvoting: Do you think I’m wrong or do you just not like what I’m saying? It seems easy to correct me about the Harvard admissions point, if I’m just factually mistaken.
- ebg13 7y ago
  > Do you think I’m wrong or do you just not like what I’m saying? Por qué no los dos?