3 ms·
I’m Asian-American, if you can’t tell by my username. My point is that very often the success of Asian-Americans even though they are a disadvantaged class has
by tylerhou 4y ago
I’m Asian-American, if you can’t tell by my username.
My point is that very often the success of Asian-Americans even though they are a disadvantaged class has been used to justify anti-Black rhetoric. In the context of this HN thread, which is specifically about D&I and hiring more Black people, bringing up a “better Asian culture” can be interpreted as a racist dogwhistle, even if it was unintentional. This is the myth of the model minority.
It’s a mistake to assume that “empirical,” “objective” observations cannot be racist. In particular, white-supremacists often intentionally present “facts” and “data” in order to paint a misleading picture. For examples, see 13/52: https://www.adl.org/resources/hate-symbol/1352-1390 https://www.adl.org/resources/hate-symbol/1352-1390. The missing context in 13/52 is that Black people have suffered much more economic and social injustice, Black areas are more likely to be policed, Black people are more likely to be arrested and convicted for the same crime, etc. It would be dishonest to simply say “Black people make up 13% of the population but commit 52%…” without supplying this additional context. I.e. even if the data itself is “objective,” the context and presentation also matters because those will affect how people interpret that data.
Again, not trying to say that you were intending to be racist. I just wanted to show you what your statements could imply and that you may be unknowingly repeating white-supremacist rhetoric.
- Manuel_D 4y agoNo, facts are not in and of themselves racist. If someone points out that men commit the vast majority of rape, and thus we shouldn't assume courts are misandrist on account of the immense inequity in rape convictions, that is not sexist. If someone points to this fact to try and justify a curfew for men, or lowered burdens of proof the yes it is. A flag showing "13/52" next to a snarling ape is undoubtedly racist. Pushing back against a quota mandating that African Americans make up no more than 13% of murder convictions, on the grounds that murder rates are not equal isn't racist. Is this really hard to comprehend? I expect the average middle schooler is capable of understanding this, and repeatedly cautioning HN readers about potentially racist readings is more than a little condescending.
- crackercrews 4y ago> can be interpreted as a racist dogwhistle, even if it was unintentional I agree that people interpret things as dogwhistles even when they were not intended that way. To me, that's a problem because it means anything can be a dogwhistle. It also doesn't make sense given the meaning of "dogwhistle" which is something that is intended to communicate to an in-group. If it is not intended, then it's not a dogwhistle.