Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Food, Cooking, and Restaurants
Reply to "Bon Appetit not paying non-white editors for appearances"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Aren’t assistant editors always paid less than editors? I don’t see the issue here but I feel it’s because I’m missing info. [/quote] So it is ok to play POC less if you give them a crappier title?[/quote] I think the real question is why all the editors are white while only assistant editors are POC. It was slightly misleading to say only white editors were paid. Only editors were paid. Yes, all those editors happen to be white. And that is the problem. It’s not that there are white editors and POC editors and only the white ones were paid. [/quote] That's how institutional racism works. No one made a rule that only white editors would get paid. It just somehow worked out that none of the POC editors were granted that title. And until this woman said something, everyone at that company, including her white coworkers, were silent on the issue. Those people probably don't consider themselves racist. But because the way the system was setup didn't hurt them, they were comfortable turning a blind eye. And if a POC had said THIS IS RACIST previously, they'd have been dismissed as a nutcase. [/quote] I agree with you. And I thinks it’s a potato, potahto thing - it’s racist either way. But I still think the focus should be on the editor/assistant editor issue along with getting paid. Framing it as “only WHITE editors got paid and POC didn’t” sets it up so people can say “Oh look POC trying to make trouble again and lying; editors got paid and assistants didn’t.” I’d also want to know whether there are white assistant editors. Did they get paid? I say this as a minority btw. [/quote] But the issue at it's core is still a race one. If you create a system where for some reason only white people are being granted the title that comes with pay, why? Why is that happening? Allowing people to dismiss it as simply a distinction between editors and associate editors, you miss the forrest for the trees. Whether there are white assistant editors is beyond the point, and simply a distraction. POC are being kept out of the paying positions, and the company (and the country) needs to reckon with why that has been allowed to happen. [/quote] Then I think we need to ask why BA doesn’t have a single BIPOC editor. And say that only editors get paid and assistants do not. That to me suggests a structural problem. Whereas the way I’ve seen it framed was “Look at Rapoport the racist, he only paid white editors and didn’t pay the minority ones.” So BA has a larger more systemic issue. We don’t just need to get the minority assistant editors paid. We need to push for more inclusive hiring and promoting practices. [/quote] I completely agree with you re the systemic issue and that needs to be addressed immediately. I want to point out though that as a member of two mixed race families (childhood and choice), I find the term BIPOC to be incredibly offensive and exclusionary. Why must any organization specifically have a BIPOC and not a POC? It is like saying that an organization specifically must have a transgender woman, disregarding other members of the LBGQT community. The point is we need more seats at the table for people in a minority group. For a minority group to call out reserving places for only their group or to place a priority on only their group is as offensive as the exclusion of all minority peoples.[/quote] FYI, "BIPOC" stands for "Black, Indigenous, Person/People Of Color." It's more inclusive than POC. The "BI" doesn't stand for "bisexual."[/quote] But doesn’t the BI part already fit into the POC definition? The BI part serves to further distinguish those groups apart from “regular” POC. [/quote] I think the idea is to unite all people of color while recognizing that black and indigenous people have vastly different interactions with white America than other POC do. If you don't like that definition, don't @ me - I'm just providing the info, not endorsing.[/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics