Anti-Racism Assembly Today?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is true. You are not required to confront racism, nor are you required to be introspective about it. You are free to continue to be racist, and apparently you can be incentivized to do this if someone was mean to you.

Spite racism: your thing, apparently.

The message is that as a white person, you will only and forever be racist purely based on the color of your skin. Your only recourse is to ponder it a lot. You cannot get rid of the stain. You can only try to atone, perpetually.

This is where it becomes religion. It's very Catholic.

This is also the whole "White Fragility" message from Diangelo.

E.g., https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/06/18/white-fragility-is-real-white-fragility-is-flawed/

oh no sometimes you have to think about stuff

There's a reason people reject Catholicism (and other religions) that isn't just the pedophilia stuff. If all anti-racism work is just self-flagellation and feeling bad (Catholic), you get people rejecting it.

My preference is actually Kendi, who seems to point to racism in systems/behaviors, not an individual, permanent stain.

The rest of us don't self-flagellate over this. When we find out that we've been messing up, we fix it and move on, instead of wallowing in grief and blaming the people who helped correct us.

But you cannot "fix" your racism, by the Diangelo school of thought. You are racist, period. You can try hard but that is all.

I mean, Diangelo would probably say that what you are doing *at present* -- trolling on the internet to call out racism -- is an example of white fragility. Your expression that you can battle racism is in fact expressing your fragility (and your racism).

This is neat, isn't it.

So is your point just that anti-racist work has to make white people feel good?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is true. You are not required to confront racism, nor are you required to be introspective about it. You are free to continue to be racist, and apparently you can be incentivized to do this if someone was mean to you.

Spite racism: your thing, apparently.

The message is that as a white person, you will only and forever be racist purely based on the color of your skin. Your only recourse is to ponder it a lot. You cannot get rid of the stain. You can only try to atone, perpetually.

This is where it becomes religion. It's very Catholic.

This is also the whole "White Fragility" message from Diangelo.

E.g., https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/06/18/white-fragility-is-real-white-fragility-is-flawed/

oh no sometimes you have to think about stuff

There's a reason people reject Catholicism (and other religions) that isn't just the pedophilia stuff. If all anti-racism work is just self-flagellation and feeling bad (Catholic), you get people rejecting it.

My preference is actually Kendi, who seems to point to racism in systems/behaviors, not an individual, permanent stain.

The rest of us don't self-flagellate over this. When we find out that we've been messing up, we fix it and move on, instead of wallowing in grief and blaming the people who helped correct us.

This. I appreciate the opportunity to do better and move on. It’s not that hard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is true. You are not required to confront racism, nor are you required to be introspective about it. You are free to continue to be racist, and apparently you can be incentivized to do this if someone was mean to you.

Spite racism: your thing, apparently.

The message is that as a white person, you will only and forever be racist purely based on the color of your skin. Your only recourse is to ponder it a lot. You cannot get rid of the stain. You can only try to atone, perpetually.

This is where it becomes religion. It's very Catholic.

This is also the whole "White Fragility" message from Diangelo.

E.g., https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/06/18/white-fragility-is-real-white-fragility-is-flawed/

oh no sometimes you have to think about stuff

There's a reason people reject Catholicism (and other religions) that isn't just the pedophilia stuff. If all anti-racism work is just self-flagellation and feeling bad (Catholic), you get people rejecting it.

My preference is actually Kendi, who seems to point to racism in systems/behaviors, not an individual, permanent stain.

The rest of us don't self-flagellate over this. When we find out that we've been messing up, we fix it and move on, instead of wallowing in grief and blaming the people who helped correct us.

But you cannot "fix" your racism, by the Diangelo school of thought. You are racist, period. You can try hard but that is all.

I mean, Diangelo would probably say that what you are doing *at present* -- trolling on the internet to call out racism -- is an example of white fragility. Your expression that you can battle racism is in fact expressing your fragility (and your racism).

This is neat, isn't it.

So is your point just that anti-racist work has to make white people feel good?

No, not at all. Just that ONLY leading people to feel bad, and not allowing a white person to ever be NOT racist, is a strategy that 1) probably won't actually achieve any sort of transformation of the institutions and policies that need to change, since the focus is only ever on interpersonal interactions versus systems, 2) apparently does get people to reject the work of anti-racism entirely, sometimes getting them to veer strongly in the wrong direction.

This brand of anti-racism (Diangelo, I mean; I do think there are many brands) also just is obviously religious. And that involves a whole host of other issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know you’re not going to like this point, but it’s the epitome of privilege to think that you should be able to set the terms for discussions of racism. This is an uncomfortable topic of conversation and it sounds like the principal did a solid amount of frontloading prior to the session.

You are welcome to your views on how racism should be discussed but if you are trying tell me that "I" and other white people MUST discuss racism without regard to how we view the conversation, then it's the epitome of foolishness to think we are ever going to engage in an honest conversation with you about anything. Doyin Richards was obnoxious, referring to hypothetical white kids as "Little Ainsley" and "Little Connor" . His disdain for White people was evident. If my pointing that out makes you think I am privileged, then please explain to everyone and me why we should allow a man like that to talk to our children like he is some kind of respected authority figure they should listen to. He is not. Shame on Janney for bringing him into this important conversation. Oh, and of course, I don't actually expect you to explain anything since, you know, I'm privileged and therefore my opinions and feelings are not worthy of your consideration. Yeah, good luck with that attitude.

TL;DR: if you don't talk about racism in a way that feels friendly and warm enough, I retain the right to remain racist, out of spite.

LOL. You wish. Just because you are a moron doesn't make me a racist. Its people like you that will make this anti-racism movement backfire in the worst way possible. And do you know what that means? It means that your perfectly normal neighbors and friends who admit they are, to an extent, racist in an effort to become an "ally in training" will instead get sick of your putting them down and "in their place". Just go on ahead and continue acting like an ass. People will only put with your shit for so long, then they will decide you are not worth the effort.

Literally you just argued that people who YOU ADMIT are somewhat racist will continue to be racist because someone was mean to them.

White are people are constantly told "this is hard work" becoming an anti-racist. The "hard work" should mean that its hard to look at your long-held assumptions, behaviors and thoughts (both conscious and unconscious) and admit they are the result of growing up White in a racist society. That IS hard for many White people to do but we are out there and willing to do THAT kind of hard work. But when the "hard work" means we have to accept that our feelings will automatically and forever be ignored - no matter what they are or why we have them - just because we are White? Yeah, that's just not normal human behavior. I'm not going to do that, and I will also make sure my children do not do that. Once you stop treating me a like a dog and getting mad because I won't accept it - then we can talk about how I can be an "ally in training"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is true. You are not required to confront racism, nor are you required to be introspective about it. You are free to continue to be racist, and apparently you can be incentivized to do this if someone was mean to you.

Spite racism: your thing, apparently.

The message is that as a white person, you will only and forever be racist purely based on the color of your skin. Your only recourse is to ponder it a lot. You cannot get rid of the stain. You can only try to atone, perpetually.

This is where it becomes religion. It's very Catholic.

This is also the whole "White Fragility" message from Diangelo.

E.g., https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/06/18/white-fragility-is-real-white-fragility-is-flawed/

This is the kind of pathetic whining that my ex-husband would spout all the time when anyone pointed out that he said sometime racist.

Spoiler: he’s a racist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is true. You are not required to confront racism, nor are you required to be introspective about it. You are free to continue to be racist, and apparently you can be incentivized to do this if someone was mean to you.

Spite racism: your thing, apparently.

The message is that as a white person, you will only and forever be racist purely based on the color of your skin. Your only recourse is to ponder it a lot. You cannot get rid of the stain. You can only try to atone, perpetually.

This is where it becomes religion. It's very Catholic.

This is also the whole "White Fragility" message from Diangelo.

E.g., https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/06/18/white-fragility-is-real-white-fragility-is-flawed/

oh no sometimes you have to think about stuff

There's a reason people reject Catholicism (and other religions) that isn't just the pedophilia stuff. If all anti-racism work is just self-flagellation and feeling bad (Catholic), you get people rejecting it.

My preference is actually Kendi, who seems to point to racism in systems/behaviors, not an individual, permanent stain.

The rest of us don't self-flagellate over this. When we find out that we've been messing up, we fix it and move on, instead of wallowing in grief and blaming the people who helped correct us.

But you cannot "fix" your racism, by the Diangelo school of thought. You are racist, period. You can try hard but that is all.

I mean, Diangelo would probably say that what you are doing *at present* -- trolling on the internet to call out racism -- is an example of white fragility. Your expression that you can battle racism is in fact expressing your fragility (and your racism).

This is neat, isn't it.

no one cares about your concern trolling

you are here defending the most fragile of white behaviors--white tears and refusal to do anti-racist work because you didn't like the way it was explained to you--by attempting to co-opt language that you neither understand nor care about.

No, I am not refusing to do anti-racist work, and I'm certainly not defending white tears or crying myself or whatever thing you are pulling out of your azz. I do care about this stuff, and have thought a lot about it. I have read the books and articles. As I have said, I'm a proponent of Kendi's, which is also...wait for it.....an anti-racism endeavor. I have a problem with Diangelo's methods, and I'm not alone in questioning the end results of her methods.

[Anonymous]

Hmmm... So are we saying that Doyin Richards' antiracism fist club belongs to the 'white fragility' DiAngelo school of thought? As opposed to Kendi's or some other? And if not, why are there 20 posts about what some white woman thinks about racims??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is true. You are not required to confront racism, nor are you required to be introspective about it. You are free to continue to be racist, and apparently you can be incentivized to do this if someone was mean to you.

Spite racism: your thing, apparently.

The message is that as a white person, you will only and forever be racist purely based on the color of your skin. Your only recourse is to ponder it a lot. You cannot get rid of the stain. You can only try to atone, perpetually.

This is where it becomes religion. It's very Catholic.

This is also the whole "White Fragility" message from Diangelo.

E.g., https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/06/18/white-fragility-is-real-white-fragility-is-flawed/

oh no sometimes you have to think about stuff

There's a reason people reject Catholicism (and other religions) that isn't just the pedophilia stuff. If all anti-racism work is just self-flagellation and feeling bad (Catholic), you get people rejecting it.

My preference is actually Kendi, who seems to point to racism in systems/behaviors, not an individual, permanent stain.

The rest of us don't self-flagellate over this. When we find out that we've been messing up, we fix it and move on, instead of wallowing in grief and blaming the people who helped correct us.

But you cannot "fix" your racism, by the Diangelo school of thought. You are racist, period. You can try hard but that is all.

I mean, Diangelo would probably say that what you are doing *at present* -- trolling on the internet to call out racism -- is an example of white fragility. Your expression that you can battle racism is in fact expressing your fragility (and your racism).

This is neat, isn't it.

So is your point just that anti-racist work has to make white people feel good?

No, not at all. Just that ONLY leading people to feel bad, and not allowing a white person to ever be NOT racist, is a strategy that 1) probably won't actually achieve any sort of transformation of the institutions and policies that need to change, since the focus is only ever on interpersonal interactions versus systems, 2) apparently does get people to reject the work of anti-racism entirely, sometimes getting them to veer strongly in the wrong direction.

This brand of anti-racism (Diangelo, I mean; I do think there are many brands) also just is obviously religious. And that involves a whole host of other issues.

You are making several assumptions about other people, based on your emotional hangups.

1. A lot of people don't feel bad when they have the opportunity to improve their actions/behaviors. The whole guilt thing is a you thing, or maybe a lapsed Catholic thing. I dunno.
2. You're assuming that people can only choose one option A) fight internal racism or B) fight institutional racism
3. The bolded is implying that people, if their only option is to feel bad about how racist they are, will choose to become more racist. I have only ever heard this from concern trolls. It is not a real thing.
4. It's not actually 'obviously' religious to those of us who grew up without religion or within backgrounds that did not place a heavy emphasis on guilt. Again, the guilt and self-flagellation is self-imposed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is true. You are not required to confront racism, nor are you required to be introspective about it. You are free to continue to be racist, and apparently you can be incentivized to do this if someone was mean to you.

Spite racism: your thing, apparently.

The message is that as a white person, you will only and forever be racist purely based on the color of your skin. Your only recourse is to ponder it a lot. You cannot get rid of the stain. You can only try to atone, perpetually.

This is where it becomes religion. It's very Catholic.

This is also the whole "White Fragility" message from Diangelo.

E.g., https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/06/18/white-fragility-is-real-white-fragility-is-flawed/

oh no sometimes you have to think about stuff

There's a reason people reject Catholicism (and other religions) that isn't just the pedophilia stuff. If all anti-racism work is just self-flagellation and feeling bad (Catholic), you get people rejecting it.

My preference is actually Kendi, who seems to point to racism in systems/behaviors, not an individual, permanent stain.

The rest of us don't self-flagellate over this. When we find out that we've been messing up, we fix it and move on, instead of wallowing in grief and blaming the people who helped correct us.

But you cannot "fix" your racism, by the Diangelo school of thought. You are racist, period. You can try hard but that is all.

I mean, Diangelo would probably say that what you are doing *at present* -- trolling on the internet to call out racism -- is an example of white fragility. Your expression that you can battle racism is in fact expressing your fragility (and your racism).

This is neat, isn't it.

So is your point just that anti-racist work has to make white people feel good?

No, not at all. Just that ONLY leading people to feel bad, and not allowing a white person to ever be NOT racist, is a strategy that 1) probably won't actually achieve any sort of transformation of the institutions and policies that need to change, since the focus is only ever on interpersonal interactions versus systems, 2) apparently does get people to reject the work of anti-racism entirely, sometimes getting them to veer strongly in the wrong direction.

This brand of anti-racism (Diangelo, I mean; I do think there are many brands) also just is obviously religious. And that involves a whole host of other issues.

You are making several assumptions about other people, based on your emotional hangups.

1. A lot of people don't feel bad when they have the opportunity to improve their actions/behaviors. The whole guilt thing is a you thing, or maybe a lapsed Catholic thing. I dunno.
2. You're assuming that people can only choose one option A) fight internal racism or B) fight institutional racism
3. The bolded is implying that people, if their only option is to feel bad about how racist they are, will choose to become more racist. I have only ever heard this from concern trolls. It is not a real thing.
4. It's not actually 'obviously' religious to those of us who grew up without religion or within backgrounds that did not place a heavy emphasis on guilt. Again, the guilt and self-flagellation is self-imposed.

can you two get a room please?...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know you’re not going to like this point, but it’s the epitome of privilege to think that you should be able to set the terms for discussions of racism. This is an uncomfortable topic of conversation and it sounds like the principal did a solid amount of frontloading prior to the session.

You are welcome to your views on how racism should be discussed but if you are trying tell me that "I" and other white people MUST discuss racism without regard to how we view the conversation, then it's the epitome of foolishness to think we are ever going to engage in an honest conversation with you about anything. Doyin Richards was obnoxious, referring to hypothetical white kids as "Little Ainsley" and "Little Connor" . His disdain for White people was evident. If my pointing that out makes you think I am privileged, then please explain to everyone and me why we should allow a man like that to talk to our children like he is some kind of respected authority figure they should listen to. He is not. Shame on Janney for bringing him into this important conversation. Oh, and of course, I don't actually expect you to explain anything since, you know, I'm privileged and therefore my opinions and feelings are not worthy of your consideration. Yeah, good luck with that attitude.

TL;DR: if you don't talk about racism in a way that feels friendly and warm enough, I retain the right to remain racist, out of spite.

LOL. You wish. Just because you are a moron doesn't make me a racist. Its people like you that will make this anti-racism movement backfire in the worst way possible. And do you know what that means? It means that your perfectly normal neighbors and friends who admit they are, to an extent, racist in an effort to become an "ally in training" will instead get sick of your putting them down and "in their place". Just go on ahead and continue acting like an ass. People will only put with your shit for so long, then they will decide you are not worth the effort.

Literally you just argued that people who YOU ADMIT are somewhat racist will continue to be racist because someone was mean to them.

White are people are constantly told "this is hard work" becoming an anti-racist. The "hard work" should mean that its hard to look at your long-held assumptions, behaviors and thoughts (both conscious and unconscious) and admit they are the result of growing up White in a racist society. That IS hard for many White people to do but we are out there and willing to do THAT kind of hard work. But when the "hard work" means we have to accept that our feelings will automatically and forever be ignored - no matter what they are or why we have them - just because we are White? Yeah, that's just not normal human behavior. I'm not going to do that, and I will also make sure my children do not do that. Once you stop treating me a like a dog and getting mad because I won't accept it - then we can talk about how I can be an "ally in training"

What are the thoughts and feelings you're not allowed to express and to whom?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is true. You are not required to confront racism, nor are you required to be introspective about it. You are free to continue to be racist, and apparently you can be incentivized to do this if someone was mean to you.

Spite racism: your thing, apparently.

The message is that as a white person, you will only and forever be racist purely based on the color of your skin. Your only recourse is to ponder it a lot. You cannot get rid of the stain. You can only try to atone, perpetually.

This is where it becomes religion. It's very Catholic.

This is also the whole "White Fragility" message from Diangelo.

E.g., https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/06/18/white-fragility-is-real-white-fragility-is-flawed/

oh no sometimes you have to think about stuff

There's a reason people reject Catholicism (and other religions) that isn't just the pedophilia stuff. If all anti-racism work is just self-flagellation and feeling bad (Catholic), you get people rejecting it.

My preference is actually Kendi, who seems to point to racism in systems/behaviors, not an individual, permanent stain.

The rest of us don't self-flagellate over this. When we find out that we've been messing up, we fix it and move on, instead of wallowing in grief and blaming the people who helped correct us.

But you cannot "fix" your racism, by the Diangelo school of thought. You are racist, period. You can try hard but that is all.

I mean, Diangelo would probably say that what you are doing *at present* -- trolling on the internet to call out racism -- is an example of white fragility. Your expression that you can battle racism is in fact expressing your fragility (and your racism).

This is neat, isn't it.

So is your point just that anti-racist work has to make white people feel good?

No, not at all. Just that ONLY leading people to feel bad, and not allowing a white person to ever be NOT racist, is a strategy that 1) probably won't actually achieve any sort of transformation of the institutions and policies that need to change, since the focus is only ever on interpersonal interactions versus systems, 2) apparently does get people to reject the work of anti-racism entirely, sometimes getting them to veer strongly in the wrong direction.

This brand of anti-racism (Diangelo, I mean; I do think there are many brands) also just is obviously religious. And that involves a whole host of other issues.

You are making several assumptions about other people, based on your emotional hangups.

1. A lot of people don't feel bad when they have the opportunity to improve their actions/behaviors. The whole guilt thing is a you thing, or maybe a lapsed Catholic thing. I dunno.
2. You're assuming that people can only choose one option A) fight internal racism or B) fight institutional racism
3. The bolded is implying that people, if their only option is to feel bad about how racist they are, will choose to become more racist. I have only ever heard this from concern trolls. It is not a real thing.
4. It's not actually 'obviously' religious to those of us who grew up without religion or within backgrounds that did not place a heavy emphasis on guilt. Again, the guilt and self-flagellation is self-imposed.

can you two get a room please?...

It is true that I would prefer to flagellate others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know you’re not going to like this point, but it’s the epitome of privilege to think that you should be able to set the terms for discussions of racism. This is an uncomfortable topic of conversation and it sounds like the principal did a solid amount of frontloading prior to the session.

You are welcome to your views on how racism should be discussed but if you are trying tell me that "I" and other white people MUST discuss racism without regard to how we view the conversation, then it's the epitome of foolishness to think we are ever going to engage in an honest conversation with you about anything. Doyin Richards was obnoxious, referring to hypothetical white kids as "Little Ainsley" and "Little Connor" . His disdain for White people was evident. If my pointing that out makes you think I am privileged, then please explain to everyone and me why we should allow a man like that to talk to our children like he is some kind of respected authority figure they should listen to. He is not. Shame on Janney for bringing him into this important conversation. Oh, and of course, I don't actually expect you to explain anything since, you know, I'm privileged and therefore my opinions and feelings are not worthy of your consideration. Yeah, good luck with that attitude.

TL;DR: if you don't talk about racism in a way that feels friendly and warm enough, I retain the right to remain racist, out of spite.

LOL. You wish. Just because you are a moron doesn't make me a racist. Its people like you that will make this anti-racism movement backfire in the worst way possible. And do you know what that means? It means that your perfectly normal neighbors and friends who admit they are, to an extent, racist in an effort to become an "ally in training" will instead get sick of your putting them down and "in their place". Just go on ahead and continue acting like an ass. People will only put with your shit for so long, then they will decide you are not worth the effort.

Literally you just argued that people who YOU ADMIT are somewhat racist will continue to be racist because someone was mean to them.

White are people are constantly told "this is hard work" becoming an anti-racist. The "hard work" should mean that its hard to look at your long-held assumptions, behaviors and thoughts (both conscious and unconscious) and admit they are the result of growing up White in a racist society. That IS hard for many White people to do but we are out there and willing to do THAT kind of hard work. But when the "hard work" means we have to accept that our feelings will automatically and forever be ignored - no matter what they are or why we have them - just because we are White? Yeah, that's just not normal human behavior. I'm not going to do that, and I will also make sure my children do not do that. Once you stop treating me a like a dog and getting mad because I won't accept it - then we can talk about how I can be an "ally in training"

What are the thoughts and feelings you're not allowed to express and to whom?

Np. Well, for example, anything the thoughtful PP puts in an answer to you will be dismissed, attacked, or used to promote your characterization of the PP as a racist. No one is permitted to have thoughts, feelings, or to formulate ideas that don't align with anti-racist dogma, so the only option is be silent and internalize that one's own thoughts, feelings, impressions, or ideas don't matter. No one wants to hear then.

[Anonymous]

I don’t think anti-racism is incompatible with qualms about a particular program’s imagery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know you’re not going to like this point, but it’s the epitome of privilege to think that you should be able to set the terms for discussions of racism. This is an uncomfortable topic of conversation and it sounds like the principal did a solid amount of frontloading prior to the session.

You are welcome to your views on how racism should be discussed but if you are trying tell me that "I" and other white people MUST discuss racism without regard to how we view the conversation, then it's the epitome of foolishness to think we are ever going to engage in an honest conversation with you about anything. Doyin Richards was obnoxious, referring to hypothetical white kids as "Little Ainsley" and "Little Connor" . His disdain for White people was evident. If my pointing that out makes you think I am privileged, then please explain to everyone and me why we should allow a man like that to talk to our children like he is some kind of respected authority figure they should listen to. He is not. Shame on Janney for bringing him into this important conversation. Oh, and of course, I don't actually expect you to explain anything since, you know, I'm privileged and therefore my opinions and feelings are not worthy of your consideration. Yeah, good luck with that attitude.

TL;DR: if you don't talk about racism in a way that feels friendly and warm enough, I retain the right to remain racist, out of spite.

LOL. You wish. Just because you are a moron doesn't make me a racist. Its people like you that will make this anti-racism movement backfire in the worst way possible. And do you know what that means? It means that your perfectly normal neighbors and friends who admit they are, to an extent, racist in an effort to become an "ally in training" will instead get sick of your putting them down and "in their place". Just go on ahead and continue acting like an ass. People will only put with your shit for so long, then they will decide you are not worth the effort.

Literally you just argued that people who YOU ADMIT are somewhat racist will continue to be racist because someone was mean to them.

White are people are constantly told "this is hard work" becoming an anti-racist. The "hard work" should mean that its hard to look at your long-held assumptions, behaviors and thoughts (both conscious and unconscious) and admit they are the result of growing up White in a racist society. That IS hard for many White people to do but we are out there and willing to do THAT kind of hard work. But when the "hard work" means we have to accept that our feelings will automatically and forever be ignored - no matter what they are or why we have them - just because we are White? Yeah, that's just not normal human behavior. I'm not going to do that, and I will also make sure my children do not do that. Once you stop treating me a like a dog and getting mad because I won't accept it - then we can talk about how I can be an "ally in training"

What are the thoughts and feelings you're not allowed to express and to whom?

Np. Well, for example, anything the thoughtful PP puts in an answer to you will be dismissed, attacked, or used to promote your characterization of the PP as a racist. No one is permitted to have thoughts, feelings, or to formulate ideas that don't align with anti-racist dogma, so the only option is be silent and internalize that one's own thoughts, feelings, impressions, or ideas don't matter. No one wants to hear then.

DP but this playing the victim stuff is exactly what I think (but could be wrong) that others were saying earlier on this thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know you’re not going to like this point, but it’s the epitome of privilege to think that you should be able to set the terms for discussions of racism. This is an uncomfortable topic of conversation and it sounds like the principal did a solid amount of frontloading prior to the session.

You are welcome to your views on how racism should be discussed but if you are trying tell me that "I" and other white people MUST discuss racism without regard to how we view the conversation, then it's the epitome of foolishness to think we are ever going to engage in an honest conversation with you about anything. Doyin Richards was obnoxious, referring to hypothetical white kids as "Little Ainsley" and "Little Connor" . His disdain for White people was evident. If my pointing that out makes you think I am privileged, then please explain to everyone and me why we should allow a man like that to talk to our children like he is some kind of respected authority figure they should listen to. He is not. Shame on Janney for bringing him into this important conversation. Oh, and of course, I don't actually expect you to explain anything since, you know, I'm privileged and therefore my opinions and feelings are not worthy of your consideration. Yeah, good luck with that attitude.

TL;DR: if you don't talk about racism in a way that feels friendly and warm enough, I retain the right to remain racist, out of spite.

LOL. You wish. Just because you are a moron doesn't make me a racist. Its people like you that will make this anti-racism movement backfire in the worst way possible. And do you know what that means? It means that your perfectly normal neighbors and friends who admit they are, to an extent, racist in an effort to become an "ally in training" will instead get sick of your putting them down and "in their place". Just go on ahead and continue acting like an ass. People will only put with your shit for so long, then they will decide you are not worth the effort.

Literally you just argued that people who YOU ADMIT are somewhat racist will continue to be racist because someone was mean to them.

White are people are constantly told "this is hard work" becoming an anti-racist. The "hard work" should mean that its hard to look at your long-held assumptions, behaviors and thoughts (both conscious and unconscious) and admit they are the result of growing up White in a racist society. That IS hard for many White people to do but we are out there and willing to do THAT kind of hard work. But when the "hard work" means we have to accept that our feelings will automatically and forever be ignored - no matter what they are or why we have them - just because we are White? Yeah, that's just not normal human behavior. I'm not going to do that, and I will also make sure my children do not do that. Once you stop treating me a like a dog and getting mad because I won't accept it - then we can talk about how I can be an "ally in training"

What are the thoughts and feelings you're not allowed to express and to whom?

Np. Well, for example, anything the thoughtful PP puts in an answer to you will be dismissed, attacked, or used to promote your characterization of the PP as a racist. No one is permitted to have thoughts, feelings, or to formulate ideas that don't align with anti-racist dogma, so the only option is be silent and internalize that one's own thoughts, feelings, impressions, or ideas don't matter. No one wants to hear then.

oh this is great "i can't tell you what it is but i promise its not racist"