I Wrote This While Pissed (Part 3 of 3)
Aight, so this is the last part of the events that unfolded within this online life of mine. It is also part of the actual reason I started to blog in the first place.
Anyway, back to the story here, so this blogger with lots of pull within the community I was opining on – posted my comments (shown in part 1 and 2) on her blog in an effort to get people on board with my line of thought. When that sht hit, I was like.. fck, I did not know this was going to get this much play! I was just pissed, and wanted to say something, I did not really intend to change anyone’s mind on this issue. Anyway she posted it, and some prominent members within the community linked it via twitter, and it finally got to Clueless White Boy Two, and he read what I wrote, in part 1 and 2, where I accused him of acting racist along with White Boy One, and well… he ain’t take that sht too kindly.
He ended up calling it a “witch hunt” – which was standard white boy tactic one, make yourself into a martyr and act like being called racist is just as bad as people burning you at the stake. Then a feminist friend of his, told him that this response was wack – he got taken aback by this, and reconsidered his position. That lasted for about a second, and then he went on to say how nothing I wrote was of substance, and instead it was just a mud flinging post, where he accused me of making him look racist when, clearly, he was anything but. All of a sudden I see AM comment and tell him to back that sht up, and that he should at least attempt to post a response to my commentary about him. Clueless White Boy Two then in denial of his action, kept saying how my thoughts lacked any substance and implied they should not be taken seriously – needless to say no one believed him. So because of some social forces at play, he decided to comment on what I wrote. What processed was this off hand defensive BS attitude, and I then…. understood this guy was too ignorant to get WTF I was saying. So I responded to him as follows.
(I do a quote by quote thing, so you get to see his response. Also, because of the quote by quote thing, the format of this post is a little messy – I could not quote my post without formatting issues, as such I just posted it as is. Take a look)
Again, things are redacted, and edited in bold, and I post this because I got enough positive feedback from people telling me I “taught” them something – demonstrating again that just because someone is emotional does not mean their ideas are irrational.
I see this did not sink in [talking to CWB2].. no matter. I did not expect it to sink in for you, I expected to be heard by others. I did not expect to be heard by someone who is awash with white privilege. I mean, I basically gave an entire outline about how these conversations go.. so that white people can avoid the pattern that is an outcome of white privilege… and here, not only did you manage to read the outline, but you manage to then function in a way that I explicitly warned you about.
I never wanted to make this about naming big names in the movement that act like racists.. because I knew the conversion would tilt towards the direction of white people demanding that I “give proof” of accusations. Just like when a woman talks of harassment, and names someone, she is met with demands of such kind. I was tempted to not write your name down as someone who needed to “check your privilege,” however, no one else did it – so I felt I had to. In part, to show the [redacted] community that no figure is above acting racist. I also knew it would get flack – you can’t say that this worry has come true yet, but I brace myself for a storm of white denialism. [This actually did not happen! So props to that community, there was no massive storm of denialism directed at me.]
You know what is funny.. you think your comment is benign. [His response to my previous posts] It is not. What it shows is a remarkable level of ignorance and arrogance. So let me begin….
“if you follow [AM] on twitter, you can see how even [CWB2] felt obligated to share his “enlightened” opinion on how to proceed.” [He quotes what I said here, and his response to that is below]
Actually, I told [WB1] that I thought what he did was wrong. I think he was wrong to call her out. I think he was wrong to tweet and blog about it. Despite our disagreement on that point, we’re still friends and he not only didn’t immediately attempt to vilify me, we’ve had some good conversations about this and other things.
Here is the interesting thing.. You provided a deeper context to what went on before your conversation with [AM]. This is good, context is necessary, but then you say all this other unnecessary stuff. The things you write have various implications.. and none of them are good.
You immediately put yourself in a position that “sides with the black people” on a previous issue. I want to note that, this does not matter…. as much as you think it does. Just because you sided against racism in one instance in the past does not mean that, in another instance in the future, that you are not actually defending racism. You do not get a “get out of jail” free card simply because you just so happened to not act racist in the past. It does not work that way. Race bias has to be constantly worked against, a past history of race neutrality does not invalidate any claim [placed in the future] that says your actions [in this separate case] can be interpreted as racist.
Then you say you had a talk with [WB1] and you are all still buddy buddy? Who cares? Why does this matter at all? There is literally no objective reason for you to outline this.. unless you are trying to imply that there is a proper way to conduct a conversation and an improper way.. of which I must fall into the later. It is weird.. you can talk to [WB1] about his racism and you guys are still friends! See.. my colored friend, that is how it is supposed to be done!
It could not be because you do not suffer from racism. It could not be that POC’s talking about racism does traumatizes [trigger memories of past racist abuse] us and thus be a primary reason for hostilities.. can’t be about that. You can not blame a woman who has a history of sexual assault for not staying on friendly terms with a person who spouts rape culture….. Yet, you fail to connect the dots on the fact that people of color do not want to be friends to people like [WB1], who acts in ways that propagates a racist culture.
You ever think of that?
It could not be because you have a prior relationship with the guy, [WB1], that this is the reason it makes you want to remain on good terms… and that people of color never heard of him. It could not be the case that we never heard of him because he never talked about issues that effected us. It could not be the case that the one time we get to hear from him, he is acting like a racist white man berating a black woman… [none of those things count apparently as explanations for the fact that] I see no reason to be nice to the fellow. If I am introduced to someone like that, excuse me if I chose to not be so damn friendly to him. This does not give you any moral upperhand to me or any other person who wishes to disassociate with people like [WB1].
And what does “remaining on good terms” even suppose to mean? What is that supposed to imply? That you are now conducting yourself in a better way than I am? That I need to follow you, [CWB2] and [WB1]’s lead on this one? Excuse me if I set my own terms on who to remain friendly with. So do not act like remaining on good terms with someone who acted racist, puts you on some kind of pedestal, it does not make you any sort behavior model to strive for.
Man, why don’t you think before you write things about which you know nothing about? You are clearly missing a lot of context here. It is ironic because you began with providing context, yet you fundamentally have shown that you lack a certain context.. you lack a social context, a political context, and historical context to even understand how you function here. I can tell that you do….. by your exchange with [AM].
Let me explain… My academic area study is around physics. So I actually know quote a lot about it. I have the papers to prove it to boot.
Let us say that some stranger came up to me and said “You can not use the Schrodinger equation to tell me the movements of the hydrogen atom because it is inherently a time independent equation.” (Note to people who do not know physics – you learn about this stuff in your third or forth year as an undergraduate in physics. This is simple stuff. I use this statement because I know most people without a physics degree are not going to understand a word of it. They will use this ignorance as a signal to themselves to say, “I have no idea about physics so I have no answer to that.”) I, on the other hand, because I have expertise.. would call him a ignorant fool, laugh, and maybe tell him why he is wrong.. and then walk away. I am not wasting years of learning physics on some guy who clearly knows nothing of it.
Now, I assure you this physics statement is as ignorant as if a creationist said “all species stay within the same kind.” [For those of us who are not scientists, I want to include another example. It is as ignorant as saying "In America kids weighs 300 pounds because they eat too many big macs"] You would only need to hear that one sentence to understand this person is ignorant and needs to go read something instead of arguing a point he can not possibly understand. (BTW the answer to that physics statement is to call that guy ignorant and inform him that this is why there is a time-dependent Schrodinger equation.. and that he should STFU and learn something from a physicist). The correct response to such ignorance is to issue the quick correction, and if such a person continues to argue.. you are entitled to walk away and tell them to go read a book on physics because they clearly have not, especially if that person does not understand the answer to the question because they have spent no time [attempting to learn] about physics.
In fact, if a professor of physics did just that, no one would question him.. even if they do not know anything about physics at all. This is because in this culture, there is this built in respect for physicists (they earned it of course.) All I would have to do is show you a diploma and you would take my word too.
Yet I sht you not… this is exactly what white people do to people of color all the time. However, because there are no diplomas handed out, and this culture is not fond of a POC’s opinion on race relations… none of them ever would respond to a person of color with the rational they would respond to the analogy above. Keep that analogy in mind, because it is going to come in play here. When I say that you sounded like an ignorant white guy that needed to shut up.. that was not an attack, it was the truth. [CWB2] has demonstrated that he is ignorant in his conversation, and in his reply here [his reply to me]…..
The first point is that in the quote above, he referred to my characterization as “vilification.” Sorry.. no. You see, my characterization is laying out the cultural context needed to identify racist tropes. White people, you need to stop this.. when a POC is telling you, that you are acting racist.. this is not a vilification, it is an assessment of your behavior – an assessment you need to take real seriously. The fact that he would call such an assessment vilification, is an indication of ignorance. Everyone can behave in a way that is racist, I am no different. It is also true that most people of privilege are terrible at identifying racist behavior. The label vilification would suggest that such an assessment is not warranted and irrational.. but that is a cliche counter argument to calling out racist behavior. No one is calling you evil… we are saying stop acting racist, and then showing how much your actions can hurt people. [I begin quoting him to show my point]
[CWB2 said]I was having a meta conversation with [AM] where I primarily sought clarification. I didn’t share any “enlightened” position, I asked questions, listened and pointed out potential problems – which I will do in ANY situation, whether I agree with the person or not. That’s called communication – it’s two-way. It’s also called cooperation – it’s how we build better arguments and avoid defending good positions with bad arguments.
I want to note that I do not need to be told what cooperation is. Do not attempt to lecture me on ways to communicate across racial differences because I have been doing this for years. I do not need your definition of cooperation, as I am educated on the subject as is. Do not assume such a trivial point can invalidate anything I have said.. and I find it highly insulting that you think such a trivial point was even missed by me. I assure you, I have missed nothing.
A copy on the conversation is here: [Link redacted but it was a link to a twitter conversation] So let me analyze it…
[AM] is illustrating a powerful point with..
If the tone of voice someone uses is enough to make you discount their argument, then you didn’t care about the issue to begin with. And the repeated demand to have things ‘calmly’ explained to you simply means you’re looking for an excuse not to listen.This goes double for people who demand calm explanations, and then IGNORE those explanations when they are given. You. Just. Don’t. Care. And while it may make you feel good to SAY you care, your actions shine through the bullshit veneer of “but I want to learn!” So if you don’t care, at least be honest with yourself and with others. You don’t have to care about every issue, but don’t lie. It’s boring
[CWB2] responds with
Maybe they didn’t care, and so aren’t very well informed, but care now…start by publicly berating them as 1st response?
Yeah no.. my alarms are set off already. [CWB2] was not there, at the event [summarized in part 1].. yet he is taking [WB1]’s word that some black woman was “berating” a white person? Why? because [WB1] said it? Does he not know there is a history of white people just like [WB1], incorrectly summarizing a black woman’s comments just like that? When in reality their perceptions of the comments are laced by racist views of black women? In my experience, whenever I here a white person summarizing what a black person said [on racism].. it is filled with racist micro-aggression, tailored to make that black person seem irrational and the white person the “king of reason.” So I, because I actually have knowledge and experience in this area.. I did not take [WB1]’s words on it… but [CWB2] did. I want to note that other knowledgeable people on race relations did not take [WB1]’s word for it either. Isn’t that interesting? This should indicate something to us all… Further…There was another white feminist who responded to [WB1] on twitter and told him [the black woman] was not “berating” as he was so keen to describe [her]. This context, I argue, right off the bat raises my alarms…
However, let us just say that he knows nothing about this.. and instead wants to talk about an intellectual point.
The conversation ensues like this..
[CWB2]: I don’t begin with hostility and I don’t assume equally informed…and I’m also not perfect.
[AM]: no, you don’t begin with hostility, but you do respond to it. Questions can be hostile.
[CWB2]: Was this question hostile? I got the impression that it wasn’t. I wasn’t there…couldn’t say.
[AM] : why don’t black people do more to combat ‘black on black crime’” isn’t a hostile question?
[CWB2]: Are you saying it’s INTRINSICALLY hostile??
[AM]: just as hostile as “are you an [member of this community] because you want to be able to rape babies”
[CWB2]:I don’t know how to respond to that other than apples and bicycles.
So by this conversation alone, by the way [CWB2] downplays the “black on black crime” comment. You are left with only two options, he is either purposefully being obtuse to a very clearly racist statement, or that he really does not know that this statement has a very very very long history in the US of being used by racist to say racist things. I am not sure which option is worse. Anyone, who has engaged in any amount of anti-racist conversation, or read any books on it whatsoever, would be aware of an obvious racist trope. Where does [CWB2] live? Did he not notice how this rhetoric was used by FOX news for weeks after the Zimmerman verdict in a racist way? Oh wait.. it might be because [CWB2] is white… that he never noticed, is not informed, or worse is being asymmetrically obtuse and unsympathetic to positions espoused by people of color.
Then when [AM] attempts to educate him, he flat out just rejects that education. He just says the analogy is not the same. I assure you [AM]‘s response is exactly the right answer. The problem with these “rationalist” type is that think that a mere acquaintance with logic gives them the ability to judge all arguments in a “fair” way in order to judge whether they are flawed. I want to note that without the historical context of the phrase “black on black crime” no matter how educated you are on how to use logic and reason, you will not be able to make heads or tails of the situation – this would explain why [CWB2] just can’t seem to figure it out, despite being given the right answer.
The idea that white people like [CWB2] have in that “I will point out informal or formal logical fallacies in all arguments!” is that this relies on the assumption that they have the ability to judge ALL arguments as fallacious or valid. You are not in a position to make such a judgement call if you do not have a good foundation of knowledge within the subject to begin with. Without a knowledge of physics, you are not going to be able to judge that persons statements – the one in the analogy above – as being rational or irrational. I promise you, no matter how much philosophy you read, or how much of a great debater you are… without some basic physics knowledge, your opinions are worthless – you simply do not have the capacity to “point out errors” because you do not understand the subject to begin with.
It is the same here… [CWB2] demonstrates, clearly, he has no knowledge base in which he can infer to… he does not have the foundation that will enable him to be able to “call out errors” of such a kind. Instead what his exchange looks like is an undergraduate physics student arguing with a physics professor because he thinks he sees an error in Einsteins equations.. when in reality the physics student does not understand the subject, and this only looks erroneous because the knowledge a physics undergraduate has, is so infantile, that they are riddled with misconceptions. [CWB2]… is the same. It is fairly obvious he is riddled with misconceptions, and fairly obvious that he does not know enough about racism to be “pointing out errors” of any kind.. not from [AM], and not from me. So before any white man corrects a person of color.. you have to ask yourself at least two questions.. “Do I have experience with the subject?” (the answer is clearly no) and “Have I attempted to accumulate a knowledge base enough such that I am confident I can point out errors to someone who is knowledgeable about the subject?” (If you have not attempted to educate yourself through the literature.. the answer is fcking no)
Now, lets look how the conversation proceeded.
[AM]: but maybe the person JUST DOESN’T KNOW that [members of this community] don’t want to rape babies. Maybe they need it calmly explained!
[CWB2]: Meanwhile, YES, maybe they do need a calm explanation starting with “Whatever gave you that idea?”
[AM]: when you ask a stupid question that is ideologically motivated 99% of the time, I’m not obliged to assume you’re the 1%
[CWB2]: I don’t accept that the numbers are representative in general, let alone within our community. Meanwhile, misinformed != hostile
[AM] : And I have no idea where the “let alone” comes from. [Our community members] are better informed about racism than the GenPop?
Now, [AM] correctly gives [CWB2] an analogy to clarify that it was such a flagrantly hostile question. Such an analogy is apt. [CWB2] says that he would have the ability to speak calmly to the person. Then [AM] points out that what if you were asked this question daily and most of the time the people who said this turned out to be extremely racist? [CWB2] says he flat out does not accept that trend. (I want to add to that.. what if you are also discriminated against because such racist ideology propagates throughout the world? It is not so easy to be that patient when you have a lifetime history of racist micro aggression chipping away at your human dignity.) That fact that he so easily says he CAN be calm and does not reflect on why others might not be able to be calm.. is again… highly illuminating to me, and I think other people of color.
I am sorry… [CWB2]. You are white. What ever gave you the idea that your experiences or your disbelief of how incredibly common that racist question is asked by very racist people… can give you any sort of rational support in rejecting the experienced of [AM]? (One that I agree with and experienced myself) He goes on to say he does not think this racist reality represents [his community].. to which [AM] rightly asked what makes him think [this community] are any less racist that the general pop – from which [AM] was deriving that experience from.
[I want to add that CWB2 is still insisting that the white woman in question who asked stuff on "black on black crime" has to be viewed, by default, as misinformed, rather than hostile. He clearly did not understand what AM said. AM said that in, his experiencing people who ask this question end up being hostile racist, not just simply misinformed whities. Yet, CWB2 insists... that all white people have to be given this "benefit of the doubt" of just being ignorant and not racist. I am sorry, when white people have a history and sociology support that they are just not ignorant but also act racist... yeah, fck your benefit of the doubt. You are basically asking POC's to deny reality just to avoid hurting white peoples feelings.. man fck that]
This whole exchange is very simple to me. [CWB2] is an example of white denialism. He is a clear example of that to boot. Not only does he reject information quite easily, he does not self reflect on why he does not see what [AM] sees. Further then, when I say he is acting racist, he puts himself out there saying he just “points out errors” never wondering if he is even INFORMED enough to engage in such an activity. This conversation alone tells me he is not informed enough to go about pointing out errors for any person of color. If he wants to get to a point where he can do so.. he needs to start reading about american racism.. something he has demonstrated he has not done, and then is insulted when this is pointed out to him.
He would not be insulted if I told him that as a physicists, by comparison to me, he does not know sht about physics… However, white privilege prevents him from making the connection that as a white person who has done nothing to educate himself on racism, by comparison, to me or [AM] or many people of color, does not know sht about it. Truth is [CWB2] is in no position to act as an arbiter for what is rational on this subject… his refusal to acknowledge that…. comers from his privileged experience as a white man.
As a man of color.. I have to say [CWB2]’s conversation is terribly cliche. In fact [AM] later tweeted that if he could only harness the power “whites telling people of color how to act when discussing racism”.. he would be able to power a city. Whether that was directed at [CWB2] I do not know.. what I do know, is that he fits that pattern of behavior easily. His statements are cliche and ignorant, his obliviousness is insulting, and the way he responds to criticism is filled with white privileged rhetoric.
In fact, if you read this tweet by [AM].. [Link redacted but I will post what he said here]
[That's recognizing that your privilege may be colouring your perception, and opening yourself for explanation/conversation. But even then, if your belief persists after the role your privilege plays is explained to you, you've acknowledged nothing.]
You can see this pattern of behavior made by privileged people can be applied to [CWB2] as well. During [a differnt] conversation [CWB2] openly admits to his unable to grasp [AM]’s point and that this might be due to his ignorance… but that does not stop him from trying to “offer advice” or “spot holes” in the arguments made from people of color? [That] is a racist micro-aggression. Is [CWB2] ganna “spot holes” in arguments made by physicists about physics? I think not… but he THINKS he can do it on this subject, and that is an irrational state of mind. [CWB2]’s actions are so filled with tell alls.. that it is ridiculous to how clueless he can be, and insulting that he thinks he can judge anyone’s argument on a subject he knows nothing about.
Now he says this…
[CWB 2 says this after reading my two previous posts] If you’re looking for people who sit by and just let bad arguments stand because they come from friends – I’m never going to be that guy. If you’re looking for people who don’t challenge you when they disagree or don’t understand – I’m never going to be that guy.
1) You are defending bad arguments already from your exchange with [AM].
2) You are not in a position to challenge anything that [AM] says to any significant degree when [AM] talks about racism. It simply is not your area of expertise and it shows. Heck you are not even in a position to challenge me by what I see of you here. You might as well “challenge” me to a physics debate on quantum mechanics… because that is about as successful you are bound to be here when you talk about racism.
[CWB2 continues]If your implication is that you’re OK with having bad arguments to support your good position, that’s your prerogative, but I can’t agree. If your implication is that if Crommunist and I disagree that I am always wrong, I can’t agree there either.
1) There are no bad argumetns being made here… accept from you. You are making the bad arguments.
2) My position is that if you don’t know what the fck you are talking about.. then you are in no position to argue points, challenge others, or lecture others. You can not lecture me on physics, and you can’t “argue” with [AM] to the strident degree in which you posture yourself. You can ask questions because clearly you are ignorant and need more information.. but to stridently put yourself in this position of power on racism, and the fact that you think you are even eligible to combat points rationally when you have so little knowledge on racism… means.. check your privilege.
[CWB keeps it going with] I’m sorry that you feel that I was “trying to argue some stupid insipid intellectual point” – but that doesn’t mean I was incorrect or that I was wrong to be discussing it. Some of us value those points, because they lead to understanding. And if having this discussion means that I’m immediately dumped into your “White privileged fools who need to STFU” category, so be it.
I am sorry that you think such trivial points need to be made to me as if I am incapable of seeing such obvious rational errors. I mean seriously.. you think my position is as lofty as… “if you disagree with [AM] you are wrong?”.. do you seriously think I am that uneducated as not being able to see such a trivial error?
What I said was that you having no knowledge. This means you are in a position, at this time, to ask questions.. not argue points with any confidence based on your basic and trivial misconceptions. I am saying that people like you are so riddle with misconceptions.. that you can literally say nothing that progresses the conversation in a coherent way.. not unless you take a step back and educate yourself first.
In physics you need to have a graduate degree to be taken semi seriously by professors (even then it ain’t that simple).. and there is a reason for that.. because you don’t want to be stuck arguing trivial points with some no nothing who has not studied but thinks he can correct you. In this instance you have DONE NOTHING and IT SHOWS to educate yourself about racism, as such you can not be taken seriously and you are in no real position to judge arguments. I can not count the number of times I had to explain to someone with a high school degree only that.. no I am sorry your opinions on time dilation, and why Einstein was wrong, are not going to be taken seriously. Get a degree and come back to me. The same is here…. I am telling you to step back and check yourself fool. You ain’t got the stuff to correct anyone. When you do, then come back… until then, stop pestering people as if your analysis is valid.. it is not… and man it is so obvious to anyone educated on the subject.
[CWB2 keeps digging with] [Edit] If I’m wrong – point out where I’m wrong, but if you just found my discussion insipid, I don’t see why that’s remotely relevant or how it shows that I’m wrong.
I see you did not even take my god damn post seriously? I just said I ain’t got the fcking patience to educate someone like you. Yet you practically “demand” that I do.. or I am not worth your time? WTF is wrong with you? I just spent like 3 fkcing hours just to educate you by writing this post… I know I should not have… I know I had the right to say “fck off, go learn something before you speak”… Yet here I am. 3 FCKING HOURS [CWB2]. 3 damn hours on some trivial racism 101 BS.
I said I am tired of being spoken to like this by white poeple.. and you come in here and do it anyway. So predictable… It is the ones filled with the most white privilege that act like you and [WB1], and [Name redacted]. No you ain’t evil… just fcking boring, predictable, and yes.. yall act racist. Yes, sometimes it pisses people off. I am giving you the privilege of my time here, when you have done nothing to educate yourself about this issue. Take a damn hint. In fact, read the comment below by [Name redacted].. because that is exactly how I feel. [Another POC came in and said that he finds it sad that I even have to write out explanations to white people. In that there is like 60 years worth of literature about racism written by black people and if white people would take the time to read it, they would not need me to explain anything to them. He said he was tired of white people "being brand new to this, and they need to step up their game and offer help - they can do this by independently educating themselves on racism instead of compelling minorities to explain it to them every time] Either do that… OR STFU already cause this sht is tiring. 50 years of stuff for you to read… and you go an demand I explain myself to you? Puhlease. I demand you go learn something before you boast how rational and great you are.
” I’ll be monitoring as the conversation unfolds, and have advised him that he can take this to his own blog if he wishes to speak without following my cantina rules.” [At this point the blogger who posted my comment tried to warn CWB2 to back off]
[CWB2 says to this] Yes, because I need to be monitored. After being attacked and submitting a calm response, it’s clear that I’m just not to be trusted. (Is sarcasm ok?) I feel so welcome.
White privileged dude saying ironic things that victimize himself…. This is a pattern, people of color are tired of this patter. When are you going to get it? Your response is calm.. that do not mean it is valuable. Do not attempt to victimize yourself simply because I am saying your pattern of behaviors falls into a pattern of behavior that is attributed to racist behavior.
[I mean, upon reflection I kind of agree that the blogger responded a little to quickly here. While I do think CWB2 was in fact clueless, I did not feel he needed to me moderated either. However, I was going to defend him, but then he came back with that BS comment attempting to victimize himself and turn the tables.. I was just like Fck that. Leave it to white people when talking about racism to take any chance they get to turn themselves into "the real victims"]
[CWB2 sets himself up as a martyr and takes the "moral high ground" by saying] Meanwhile, I have no blog to post on and don’t plan to respond again here. And I only plan to respond (elsewhere) to actual arguments, rather than name-calling and inaccurate representations of my positions.
[AM parodying white people] “tone provides me with an excuse to not have to self-reflect”
Basically, [CWB2] you using name calling to completely and utterly not take in the information I laid out for you in my guest post. Why don’t you just listen?.. instead of acting like you can “correct” anyone.. because I assure you.. nothing you have said thus far is new, and nothing demonstrates knowledge. In fact it demonstrates ignorance. Instead of realizing your ignorance and listening.. you come here to lecture. Lecture me on how to behave, lecture me on what cooperation is, implying that because you still “remained” friends with [WB1] that this is how things should be done, and showing you are so keen on “rationality” despite not understand the sociopolitical and historical concepts that are necessary for you to actually have a rational position on racism.
Sorry, I don’t buy it.. and no one else should either. You are an example of how not to behave not an example of “rationality” or whatever you think of yourself as. You are an example about how not understanding the nature of privilege and not knowing how racism functions can lead to you doing and saying silly things that fall into a pattern of racist micro-aggressions.
So at that point I tore into that fcking homie as hard as I could and as rationally as I could. You do not go after the big dog in a community if you are not willing to back up accusations. with a well tuned argument. He did not respond anymore though.
Instead AM came in to leave a comment. He felt it was necessary for him to comment on this issue because I name dropped him way too many times and it could be misinterpreted as as me explaining what his thoughts were on this issue. So he stopped by and said that:
1) He too is tired of all the “white advice” given to him on social issues.
2) In this case, he was not offended by the conversations that took place – even though I was.
3) He talked to CWB2 in private and made him realize that his comments can easily be interpreted as a racist micro aggression.
4) He said that we wants to give CWB2 some props for at least willing to take a step back and reanalyze what went wrong here. In that WB1, the one who started the incident only dug deeper and become more racist, while CWB2 took a step back and reevaluated his behavior. Saying that CWB2 behavior is therefore, in part commendable because he was at least willing to see his mistake while WB1 lost massive point for acting as a stupid racist after being told what he did was wrong.
5) AM said that CWB2 wanted his statements to be independent of the context of the situation at hand, and AM told him why this was a terrible idea. That POC’s do not have the luxury of “context independence” – that is only an idea white people can have.
(This was part of the reason I decided to write “Context Independence” in my first post.. to explore the stupidity of that idea. Read that if you want to know why it is a terrible position to take)
That is basically how it ended. I told AM that I appreciated his comments and that I too think the distinction is worth mentioning between CWB2 and WB1. I also told him that while he was not offended…. I was, so I felt the need to comment, Finally I apologized for name dropping him so much, as I feel that, upon reflection I did not do this with enough tact and I gave the implication that he was just as insulted as I was, when in reality he was not that insulted by it. I always have to remember different POC’s have different tolerance levels and even though they may agree this or that action is racist… they may not be bothered by it as much as other people are.
After all that.. I kind of decided I wanted a space for myself to write all these things down, and sort of weave my own way into the dialogue – hence this blog.
Now to reveal who was who and where this took place.
Awesome Mofo (AM) was crommunist, that can he found here: http://freethoughtblogs.com/crommunist
Clueless White Boy Two (CWB2) was Matt Dillihunty, and he can be found working at the ACA, atheist community of Austin. He also produces the web tv show called the atheist experience. Found here: http://www.atheist-experience.com/ I hope Matt has taken the time to rethink his responses and take in what I was talking about.
BTW.. the atheist experience show is a pretty cool production and I really am a huge fan of them. That is why, when I saw Matt talk like come clueless white dude, I decided to light the fire under his ass – as a compliment. If I had no respect for the dude, I would not have even responded at all. I still have respect for him, I just also know that talking about racism is not his thing – I mean, clearly not his thing! Mofo better either keep his fcking mouth shut or attempt to educate himself on racial issues before he defends racist ideologies.
White Boy One (WB1) was JT Eberhard – fck that racist guy.
Awesome White Woman (AWW) was Greta Christina who can be found here: http://freethoughtblogs.com/greta
The blogger, who gave me more “press” than I bargained for is Dana Hunter, to be found here: (The orignial convo can be found there too) http://freethoughtblogs.com/entequilaesverdad/2013/08/26/guest-post-i-am-tired-of-being-treated-as-a-subhuman-when-i-get-angry-over-racism/
A special shout out to Sikivu Hutchinson, post here: , for her excellent analysis on why JT’s actions are racist http://freethoughtblogs.com/blackskeptics/2013/08/22/white-boyz-with-problems/
Another shout out to Jen McCreight on blag hag: who took JT to task.http://freethoughtblogs.com/blaghag
Finally if you have not figured it out yet, the community in question was this online atheist community located on the freethoughtblog network. And of course SquidFool, SF, is PZ Myers, whom I give a lot of respect to.http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula