Wednesday, July 1, 2009

Way to be selective...

There is a post at Feministing today about the reversal on reversal of the Ricci v. DeStefano case. Regardless of how one feels about the first decision or this recent decision to reverse that first decision there is nothing wrong with wanting to talk about it. However when talking about it there is no need for a blatant disregard for past decisions on various -isms.
...why is racial discrimination only considered an offense when it is women or people of color being biased against whites?

What a nice way to disregard all the past lawsuits launched and won over sexist, racist, ageist, and who knows how many other discriminatory practices.

I find it very amazing how people can manage to remember to lump all whites or all males together when its time to blame them for something but then turn around and forget about them when it comes time to acknowledge their efforts. For this country to be run by rich old white guys that don't care about anyone that isn't like them there sure as hell someone out there helping these people get justice for being wronged.

Thankfully someone did call her out on this question (although I'm not sure if its a good thing or a bad thing that no one else said anything):

Denny's, Abercrombie, Apple computers, Morgan Stanley, Wal-Mart, and about a zillion other rightfully sued companies would beg to differ. I'm sure they wish you were right, but you're not and they were not.

Racial discrimination is wrong no matter who the perpetrator is and no matter who the victim is.(Links added by me.)

It's one thing to say that there is still a lot to be done but to ignore the fact that wrongs are being righted and injustices are being corrected (or compensated as best as possible) when it is convenient undermines the people in the system that are trying to make things right for those victims and it erases the victims that were wronged.


13 comments:

Guest said...

So here is my thought...when a test is issued and POC overwhelmingly fail to make the grade it is not the people that are at fault it is the test. Anytime the results are so clearly divided along racial lines there is an issue that needs to be addressed. These men were not discriminated against they were simply not allowed to benefit from their undeserved white privilege. You will not that NO ONE got promoted in the original decision. We do not live in a meritocracy and therefore obvious there were systemic issues that caused such divided results.

Danny said...

Perhaps privilege was at work but the results of that original test are not enough to say that there was...at least IMHO. And frankly I think people are being quick to shout privilege. (Hell if this had been reversed with a few whites and lot of Latinos and those few whites complained people would be tripping over themselves to say they were just mad they didn't get to cash in white privilege.)

And even still none of this explains why the writer of that feministing post's claim that the only discrimination that is considered offensive is when its women or minorities. Yes discrimination is all over the place but a one sided claim like she made is factually incorrect.

aych said...

Danny, we can also feel free to talk about such things as the need to defend Roe v Wade (a decision made by white men), the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (made by white men), or the Equal Pay Act of 1963 (eeevil white men again), or VAWA (mostly white men) without ever, you know, noticing how the patriarchs undermined their own privileges without much of a fight.

It's important not to let the white mehnz off the hook, even for an isntant. For instance, if you'd wish for a 1% increase in the feminist effort which is allocated to bettering the status of women in the Third World and especially the Islamic world, now you're an evil colonialist and they can see straight through your sinister plot.

womanistmusings said...

Danny, we can also feel free to talk about such things as the need to defend Roe v Wade (a decision made by white men), the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (made by white men), or the Equal Pay Act of 1963 (eeevil white men again), or VAWA (mostly white men) without ever, you know, noticing how the patriarchs undermined their own privileges without much of a fight.

God I hope you didn't have a straight face when you wrote that steaming pile of bullshit. Those decision were the result of DECADES worth of activism. Also you don't get a cookie for doing the right thing.

Danny said...

There is no asking for a cookie involved in this. Its a matter of having one's contributions actively ignored. There is a big difference between simply not be acknowledged/mentioned and being told you didn't do anything at all.

aych said...

Danny, I don't think she managed to pick-up on the fact that I was deploying a form of selective vision which was calculated to tick-off the PC-patrol.

womanistmusings said...

@Danny who claimed that no action was taken? The point is that it does not nearly amount to enough. The world is highly divided by our tendency to understand hierarchy as normal despite its disastrous results.

@aych what you can PC police is a tendency to believe that all bodies matter. Try that out cookie monster.

Danny said...

By the writer of that post claiming that the only discrimination that is considered offensive is discrimination committed by women and people of color pretty much says people are apparently letting acts of discrimination by white men slide. She could have very well said, "not nearly amount to enough" and gotten the point across even better but the way she worded that sounds like nothing is being done.

aych said...

I guess I don't see why womanistmusings feels the need to defend a factually-incorrect post at feministing by pretending that it said something apart from what it actually said.

Guest said...

"...why is racial discrimination only considered an offense when it is women or people of color being biased against whites?"

Excuse me? How do white women rate as "women.....biases aginst whites? This is more of the same - denying white women's racism, and trying to do a moral piggyback on primarily African-American struggles against discrimination.

And it is an unneccesaary bit of dishonesty. There was plenty of blatant sexist descirimination that white women faced; it deserves to get its own place in the sun. It doesn't need to piggyback on anything, and piggybacking just generates a lot of artificial and confusing contradictions.

Meadester said...

aych said:
It's important not to let the white mehnz off the hook, even for an isntant. For instance, if you'd wish for a 1% increase in the feminist effort which is allocated to bettering the status of women in the Third World and especially the Islamic world, now you're an evil colonialist and they can see straight through your sinister plot.

Yes well that is the nature of political correctness, multi-culturalism, or whatever you want to call the group based perpetual grievance movement. When two or more of their designated oppressed groups have a conflict they can set it up so that you can't win no matter what side you take. Side with a minority man against a white woman and your a sexist, take the opposite side and your a racist. Granted, this is usually based on a real disagreement in the PC movement about who is most oppressed, but don't expect much support from those in the multi-cult camp who happen to agree with you, because that would be giving you a cookie.

BTW, Danny I'd like to give you a "cookie" for posting this. Good work! I especially appreciate your willingness as an African-American to stand up to the bullies in your community who would label people like you a traitor. I do believe you are doing your part to help those in pain,"healing, helping, overcoming." Not just white men but also minorities and women who are falsely accused of being "affirmative action hires or admissions" even though they are highly qualified for their positions.

Danny said...

Dishonest indeed. BTW if you don't mind Guest please use some sort of nickname so that we won't have several different "Guest" identities confusing us.

Danny said...

Actually I haven't encountered any traitor accusations Meadster but thanks for the kudos. I'm just trying to do my part to level out the playing field and I think one big part of it not to get caught up in a hysterical rage thinking that some sides are the enemy that deserves whatever unfair treatment it gets as punishment for things their ancestors did (and what some of them are doing today) and that other sides should be allowed to get away with anything as reparations for things their ancestors suffered (and what some of them are suffering today).

-->