"But I'm just being realistic!" he countered. "Racists won't change, so black parents should give their kids race-neutral names."
"If we accept racism as an immutable fact and act as if we must all adapt our lives to fit their biases," I said, "we help perpetuate racism. We practice racism-by-proxy."
So his unstated - and perhaps un-self-examined - argument is racism-by-proxy: "I'M not racist, but THEY are …
Again, racism-by-proxy: "I'M not racist … but THEY are and we must cater to them."
@HillaryClinton did, with her "basket of deplorables" remark … and the response was swift and furious. How dare she "insult the voters?"
Because, again, racism-by-proxy assumes racism is immutable and we must cater to it.
As if voter sexism is an immutable - or at best glacial - force that cannot be challenged and thus must be accommodated …
"I'M not sexist," the pundits say (or would if pressed), "but MANY VOTERS are and Dems need to accept that."
Like my son, years ago, they're "just being realistic."
Racism- and sexism-by-proxy are, indeed, racism and sexism.
Arguing that we must cater to racists … is racist.
Arguing that we must cater to sexists … is sexist.
It's telling POC and women that racism and sexism are immutable - or at best glacial - forces … rather than personal-cultural-structural choices and policies.
It says we must meekly accept their bigotry … unless and until they choose to change … somehow, someday.