3 ms·
>> 5. Show interest in multiculturalism. But do not culturally appropriate. > Oh come on. All people ask is things like: don't do blackface, it's dumb. Like dr
by defen 6y ago
>> 5. Show interest in multiculturalism. But do not culturally appropriate.
> Oh come on. All people ask is things like: don't do blackface, it's dumb. Like dressing up as an SS. Fully legal, as it should be, but really dumb.
I saw this document[1] making the rounds on twitter recently. Do you think the proposals in the document are good ones that all people should adhere to, or do you think they are completely ridiculous and worthy of ridicule? Or somewhere in between? I'm specifically speaking of the AAVE section.
[1] https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/1Ioy3CDX_iR75DNJwvz7ftq51EXAvZ99C51HP1V_zPOY https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/1Ioy3CDX_iR75DNJwvz7f...
- pseudalopex 6y agoMaking the rounds could mean endorsing it or ridiculing it. Or anything in between. Why does this document even matter?
- defen 6y agoThe people who I saw sharing it were definitely serious about it and not ridiculing it. > Why does this document even matter? There is a massive discussion thread here, with multiple people saying "No one believes <unreasonable thing X>; it's really about <reasonable thing Y>". As in, "no one believes using a 100 emoji is cultural appropriation; people are just saying don't wear blackface". But every single bit of evidence (which includes things like best-selling books, essays in the prestige press, statements by government officials, etc) is dismissed as not real evidence that a substantial number of people believe something. I suppose it's not something that can be resolved by Internet argumentation, only time. In a couple years we'll know whether this document is indeed ridiculous, or whether it's obvious that non-Black people should not use AAVE slang online.