My issue isn't with her nomination, nor with the validity of the decision to scrap the test results of all the firefighters who took that test. Rather, I am concerned for the majority/power-holding group members. And yes, maybe I'm concerned about Rush Limbaugh. See, it seems to me that the idea of 'reverse' anything that changes years/decades/centuries of oppression is a good thing - a change in direction. Let's have 'reverse sexism' or 'reverse anti-Semitism' or 'reverse homophobia'. Our society, for the most part, seems to have decided that both racism and discrimination are bad practices...scornful, even. So, if we're 'reversing' racism and discrimination, aren't we saying that we're changing them, since we agree that both are bad practices? So it seems that Mr. Limbaugh and others who use these terms are suggesting that those who practice 'reverse racism' and 'reverse discrimination' are doing good by our societal standards -- taking a stance to eradicate both from our society. I was under the impression that both ends of the political spectrum in this country wanted that.
My suggestion? If you're in power and you feel that the actions of an individual or group are racist, call it Racism. If the person is a minority group member, or the group/organization is discriminating against you because of your race, call it Racism.
"Reverse racism" does sound more polite, though...softer...
No comments:
Post a Comment