• Owl [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    edit-2
    17 days ago

    I don’t think dropping this without explanation is ever helpful. People use “racist” to mean “prejudiced” and other people use “racist” to mean “act in a way that reinforces institutional racism,” and without specifying which one you mean, you’re just being smug at someone because you use a cooler definition of a word.

    • hello_hello [undecided, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      16 days ago

      I do agree that needing an explanation is good, but.

      cooler definition of a word.

      I disagree, the systemic definition of racism is the only correct one. Racism reduced down to just personal bigotry is incorrect and it gets spread because it perpetuates the racist system by colloquially reducing its impact.

      People who use racist to mean prejudiced or personally unfair are not using the term in good faith.

        • hello_hello [undecided, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          16 days ago

          I don’t understand how this relates to what I said. Words have multiple meanings and don’t have intrinsic meaning but there are ones that are more appropriate than others.

          Allowing people to subvert the systemic meaning of racism whitewashes its impact. Black people cannot be racist towards white people because it has no basis systemically. Minorities can perpetuate systems of oppression against themselves but its never becomes a “reverse racism”

          In other words, who benefits from the meaning of racism being stripped of it’s systemic meaning? Considering the context is some dbzero user trying to claim white people are oppressed and misandry is real this isnt an issue that’s “lost in translation.”