New York times op ed on maintaining black spaces

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like Black Fragility.

The author readily admits that, and for good reason.

As the couple wandered on, no books in hand, I thought about how fragile my feeling of being settled is. It didn’t matter that I own my house, as many of my neighbors do. Generations of racism, Jim Crow, disinvestment and redlining have meant that we don’t really control our own spaces

The author desires a neighborhood where they get to decide who has access? We have those. It's called gated communities. Move there.

You completely misinterpreted that. Willfully, to fit your racist narrative. It's like you didn't even read it. Is a black woman's perspective not worthy of your consideration?

We considered it and it sounds a lot like racism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I usually do a mental exercise when I read stuff like this where I switch the races up. Could you imagine the NYT publishing an article with the following text:

What I resented was not this specific couple. It was their blackness, and my feelings of helplessness at not knowing how to maintain the integrity of a White space that I had created.

How is it different when the races are switched around? Especially when we are talking about a little library on your front lawn that is supposed to be for everyone in the community. What is the author arguing for? Does she want explicit white and black neighborhoods where the races don't mix? Would that make her happy? I'm with you OP, I just don't get it. This is the NY Times here, not an anonymous post on a message board or nextdoor or facebook where people can vent about every little thing.

It's different because blacks have historically been persecuted by whites. If you'd read the entire article, you'd get that.

No, it is not different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like Black Fragility.

The author readily admits that, and for good reason.

As the couple wandered on, no books in hand, I thought about how fragile my feeling of being settled is. It didn’t matter that I own my house, as many of my neighbors do. Generations of racism, Jim Crow, disinvestment and redlining have meant that we don’t really control our own spaces

The author desires a neighborhood where they get to decide who has access? We have those. It's called gated communities. Move there.

You completely misinterpreted that. Willfully, to fit your racist narrative. It's like you didn't even read it. Is a black woman's perspective not worthy of your consideration?

We considered it and it sounds a lot like racism.

Such a flippant response. It really shows the lack of respect you have for anyone whose perspectives and experiences are different than yours. And you still have no response for how you totally and willfully misinterpreted what she wrote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I usually do a mental exercise when I read stuff like this where I switch the races up. Could you imagine the NYT publishing an article with the following text:

What I resented was not this specific couple. It was their blackness, and my feelings of helplessness at not knowing how to maintain the integrity of a White space that I had created.

How is it different when the races are switched around? Especially when we are talking about a little library on your front lawn that is supposed to be for everyone in the community. What is the author arguing for? Does she want explicit white and black neighborhoods where the races don't mix? Would that make her happy? I'm with you OP, I just don't get it. This is the NY Times here, not an anonymous post on a message board or nextdoor or facebook where people can vent about every little thing.

It's different because blacks have historically been persecuted by whites. If you'd read the entire article, you'd get that.

No, it is not different.

Yeah, it is different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like Black Fragility.

The author readily admits that, and for good reason.

As the couple wandered on, no books in hand, I thought about how fragile my feeling of being settled is. It didn’t matter that I own my house, as many of my neighbors do. Generations of racism, Jim Crow, disinvestment and redlining have meant that we don’t really control our own spaces

The author desires a neighborhood where they get to decide who has access? We have those. It's called gated communities. Move there.

You completely misinterpreted that. Willfully, to fit your racist narrative. It's like you didn't even read it. Is a black woman's perspective not worthy of your consideration?

We considered it and it sounds a lot like racism.

Such a flippant response. It really shows the lack of respect you have for anyone whose perspectives and experiences are different than yours. And you still have no response for how you totally and willfully misinterpreted what she wrote.

You are allowed to have a 'different perspective' all you want.

People are also allowed to call you out when it is racist. Simple as that. Don't publish racist diatribe if you can't handle the fire. The author is profoundly racist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That op ed viewpoint is a fringe viewpoint in today’s climate.

That was given a megaphone.
And of course it’s going to be cherry picked to death by Fox News
And the Daily Caller and every other RWNJ website and news outlet.
These isn’t an interesting thought exercise.
Its unhelpful.
We have to find a place to unite in the middle.
This kind of stuff isn’t going to get us there.

The op-ed actually was a middle ground. It sounds like you're the one who needs to "get there". Sorry, but you're not entitled to dictate how black people identify themselves.

FoxNews won’t be be printing the full article. Half the country will read the choice excerpts on Facebook and become appropriately enraged.
Shame on the NYT’s.

Shame on the NYT for what? Is the topic not allowed to be discussed? Is FoxNews incapable of displaying a balanced summary?

Yes. OF COURSE FOX NEWS IS INCAPABLE OF DISPLAYING A BALANCED SUMMARY!
are you new to earth?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like Black Fragility.

The author readily admits that, and for good reason.

As the couple wandered on, no books in hand, I thought about how fragile my feeling of being settled is. It didn’t matter that I own my house, as many of my neighbors do. Generations of racism, Jim Crow, disinvestment and redlining have meant that we don’t really control our own spaces

The author desires a neighborhood where they get to decide who has access? We have those. It's called gated communities. Move there.

You completely misinterpreted that. Willfully, to fit your racist narrative. It's like you didn't even read it. Is a black woman's perspective not worthy of your consideration?

We considered it and it sounds a lot like racism.

Such a flippant response. It really shows the lack of respect you have for anyone whose perspectives and experiences are different than yours. And you still have no response for how you totally and willfully misinterpreted what she wrote.

Can you tell me, from your point of view, what the anecdote regarding the little library and her feeling on seeing a white person looking at it adds to her discussion of the problems with gentrification?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rather than considering the entire op-ed, y'all are cherry picking certain passages that trigger your fear cortex.

This! Most are missing the point.

I’m sorry I cherry picked these actual words.:

“ Then one morning, glancing out my front window, I saw a young white couple stopped at the library. Instantly, I was flooded with emotions — astonishment, and then resentment, and then astonishment at my resentment. It all converged into a silent scream in my head of, Get off my lawn!

The moment jolted me into realizing some things I’m not especially proud of. I had set out this library for all who lived here, and even for those who didn’t, in theory. I would not want to restrict anyone from looking at it or taking books, based on race or anything else. But while I had seen white newcomers to the neighborhood here and there, the truth was, I hadn’t set it out to appeal to white residents.

Now that they were in front of my house, curious about this new neighborhood attraction, I didn’t know how to feel. By bringing this modern cultural artifact here from white neighborhoods, had I set myself up, set up the neighborhood? Was I contributing to gentrification and sending the wrong message about how I wanted the neighborhood to be?

What I resented was not this specific couple. It was their whiteness, and my feelings of helplessness at not knowing how to maintain the integrity of a Black space that I had created.”

It sounds like the author would prefer segregation.

No. It sounds like rhe author is confronting their own subconscious biases. They aren't calling for black only neghborhoods. They arent calling for balck only little free libraries. Theyre just writing about the strange realization that they arent perfect and that they also have their own subconscious biases. She saw a fault in herself and tried to examine it.

I would think you all would want to celebrate this op-ed. It's just like white people in predominantly white neighborhoods that acidentally stare at black people there. Everyone has work to do. We all make judgements and assumptions about strangers based on nothing but looks that are often wrong and come from an unrealized bad place. We can all be better at being best.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That op ed viewpoint is a fringe viewpoint in today’s climate.

That was given a megaphone.
And of course it’s going to be cherry picked to death by Fox News
And the Daily Caller and every other RWNJ website and news outlet.
These isn’t an interesting thought exercise.
Its unhelpful.
We have to find a place to unite in the middle.
This kind of stuff isn’t going to get us there.

The op-ed actually was a middle ground. It sounds like you're the one who needs to "get there". Sorry, but you're not entitled to dictate how black people identify themselves.

FoxNews won’t be be printing the full article. Half the country will read the choice excerpts on Facebook and become appropriately enraged.
Shame on the NYT’s.

Shame on the NYT for what? Is the topic not allowed to be discussed? Is FoxNews incapable of displaying a balanced summary?

Yes. OF COURSE FOX NEWS IS INCAPABLE OF DISPLAYING A BALANCED SUMMARY!
are you new to earth?

Wait. Help me out here.

The NYT publishes an OpEd that is being widely criticized.
The NYT.

How did Fox News become part of the discussion?

[Anonymous]

We are now so progressive that we are back to segregation.

Man, this is some horshoe theory stuff going on right here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rather than considering the entire op-ed, y'all are cherry picking certain passages that trigger your fear cortex.

This! Most are missing the point.

I’m sorry I cherry picked these actual words.:

“ Then one morning, glancing out my front window, I saw a young white couple stopped at the library. Instantly, I was flooded with emotions — astonishment, and then resentment, and then astonishment at my resentment. It all converged into a silent scream in my head of, Get off my lawn!

The moment jolted me into realizing some things I’m not especially proud of. I had set out this library for all who lived here, and even for those who didn’t, in theory. I would not want to restrict anyone from looking at it or taking books, based on race or anything else. But while I had seen white newcomers to the neighborhood here and there, the truth was, I hadn’t set it out to appeal to white residents.

Now that they were in front of my house, curious about this new neighborhood attraction, I didn’t know how to feel. By bringing this modern cultural artifact here from white neighborhoods, had I set myself up, set up the neighborhood? Was I contributing to gentrification and sending the wrong message about how I wanted the neighborhood to be?

What I resented was not this specific couple. It was their whiteness, and my feelings of helplessness at not knowing how to maintain the integrity of a Black space that I had created.”

It sounds like the author would prefer segregation.

No. It sounds like rhe author is confronting their own subconscious biases. They aren't calling for black only neghborhoods. They arent calling for balck only little free libraries. Theyre just writing about the strange realization that they arent perfect and that they also have their own subconscious biases. She saw a fault in herself and tried to examine it.

I would think you all would want to celebrate this op-ed. It's just like white people in predominantly white neighborhoods that acidentally stare at black people there. Everyone has work to do. We all make judgements and assumptions about strangers based on nothing but looks that are often wrong and come from an unrealized bad place. We can all be better at being best.

I think you are projecting your feelings onto her. She says "So what message do I hope they took from my library? The same message I wanted to send to the rest of my neighbors, my community: Black presence has value — in every sense of the word, and on its own terms.

That value should make the casual displacement of Black people untenable, even immoral. And that will take much more than a little library to rectify." as her conclusion. So nothing about recognizing a faulty in herself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That op ed viewpoint is a fringe viewpoint in today’s climate.

That was given a megaphone.
And of course it’s going to be cherry picked to death by Fox News
And the Daily Caller and every other RWNJ website and news outlet.
These isn’t an interesting thought exercise.
Its unhelpful.
We have to find a place to unite in the middle.
This kind of stuff isn’t going to get us there.

The op-ed actually was a middle ground. It sounds like you're the one who needs to "get there". Sorry, but you're not entitled to dictate how black people identify themselves.

FoxNews won’t be be printing the full article. Half the country will read the choice excerpts on Facebook and become appropriately enraged.
Shame on the NYT’s.

Shame on the NYT for what? Is the topic not allowed to be discussed? Is FoxNews incapable of displaying a balanced summary?

Yes. OF COURSE FOX NEWS IS INCAPABLE OF DISPLAYING A BALANCED SUMMARY!
are you new to earth?

Wait. Help me out here.

The NYT publishes an OpEd that is being widely criticized.
The NYT.

How did Fox News become part of the discussion?

Go to the top of this exchange. Read from there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rather than considering the entire op-ed, y'all are cherry picking certain passages that trigger your fear cortex.

This! Most are missing the point.

I’m sorry I cherry picked these actual words.:

“ Then one morning, glancing out my front window, I saw a young white couple stopped at the library. Instantly, I was flooded with emotions — astonishment, and then resentment, and then astonishment at my resentment. It all converged into a silent scream in my head of, Get off my lawn!

The moment jolted me into realizing some things I’m not especially proud of. I had set out this library for all who lived here, and even for those who didn’t, in theory. I would not want to restrict anyone from looking at it or taking books, based on race or anything else. But while I had seen white newcomers to the neighborhood here and there, the truth was, I hadn’t set it out to appeal to white residents.

Now that they were in front of my house, curious about this new neighborhood attraction, I didn’t know how to feel. By bringing this modern cultural artifact here from white neighborhoods, had I set myself up, set up the neighborhood? Was I contributing to gentrification and sending the wrong message about how I wanted the neighborhood to be?

What I resented was not this specific couple. It was their whiteness, and my feelings of helplessness at not knowing how to maintain the integrity of a Black space that I had created.”

It sounds like the author would prefer segregation.

No. It sounds like rhe author is confronting their own subconscious biases. They aren't calling for black only neghborhoods. They arent calling for balck only little free libraries. Theyre just writing about the strange realization that they arent perfect and that they also have their own subconscious biases. She saw a fault in herself and tried to examine it.

I would think you all would want to celebrate this op-ed. It's just like white people in predominantly white neighborhoods that acidentally stare at black people there. Everyone has work to do. We all make judgements and assumptions about strangers based on nothing but looks that are often wrong and come from an unrealized bad place. We can all be better at being best.

I think you are projecting your feelings onto her. She says "So what message do I hope they took from my library? The same message I wanted to send to the rest of my neighbors, my community: Black presence has value — in every sense of the word, and on its own terms.

That value should make the casual displacement of Black people untenable, even immoral. And that will take much more than a little library to rectify." as her conclusion. So nothing about recognizing a faulty in herself.

Yeah, I think her ego or editor got in the way. It's very disjointed and poorly constructed. The second half of the op-ed does not really connect to the first. It's two different half conpleted articles rolled into one. But it did have the potential to be an interesting self-relfective piece.

[Anonymous]

Isn't there an entire other thread where our DCUM libs swear the media is against the left's agenda?? I swear it to be true...yet...we have this thread...thx NYT's for proving the point!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Isn't there an entire other thread where our DCUM libs swear the media is against the left's agenda?? I swear it to be true...yet...we have this thread...thx NYT's for proving the point!

This article absolutely undermines the democratic agenda.
Have fun posting the most enraging excepts on Facebook!
Enjoy riling up that RWNJ base!