I have something on my mind. Two things which are connected, one from years ago and one recently.
Many of us are old enough to first have heard the term “diversity” applied to things like movies and TV. No matter what it was, you *had* to have one black character in it, in some minor role at least. This was the TOKEN black character. This happened sometime in the 80s or 90s.
All of us are familiar with the token black character. One of my friends at the time called this the “Unnecessary Negro” trope. Like a song I don’t like that nevertheless gets stuck in my head, that name has stuck with me.
Partly because my friend always used to note it when we were watching movies/tv: “Boom! There’s the Unnecessary Negro.” He always kept an eye out for the Unnecessary Negro, which annoyed my race-blind movie/tv-watching. I wouldn’t *notice* race unless someone pointed it out.
After college, I no longer watched tv/movies with my friend, and contentedly fell back into my default of not noticing race in my entertainment—unless it was thrust in my face. So the "Unnecessary Negro” fell out of my consciousness for decades.
I had a talk with another old friend the other day, and one of the things he brought up was that he’d seen a movie WITH NO BLACK PEOPLE IN IT. He’s a left-leaning centrist politically. But “It felt good. It was refreshing,” he told me. I wasn’t sure how to feel about that.
The other day, I found myself watching a movie (low-budget, psychological, weird — not bad) called Cube²: Hypercube. The whole *point* of the movie is that it is small group of people who are trapped somewhere. And none of them were black—not all white, just no black people.
And at some point, my unconscious, thanks to my one friend’s recently relief at getting through a whole movie with no black people, threw up the old term “Unnecessary Negro.” Would *this* movie have an “Unnecessary Negro”? The question started to disrupt my immersion in the film.
It didn’t seem likely, since there were no blacks among the trapped people, and it seemed they were all going to die. I won’t spoil IF they all died, but the final scene took us outside their extradimensional prison—a military experiment. And the General in charge was black.
I instantly heard the voice of my friend from college (only in my mind; he’s dead now; he was the first of my college friends to die):

“Boom! There’s the Unnecessary Negro!”
This is bothering me because I have successfully lived my life according to the idea and ideal of race-indifference (so-called “color blindness”, which is a bad term because it is misused by the Woke who pretend to take it literally).
MANY times in my life, people who today would be called “of color” by today’s progressives, both personally and professionally, have told me how much they appreciate the way I don’t treat anyone differently on the basis of race. That’s IMPORTANT in a classroom.
I remember one time I was visiting my friend Ben (Jew; white?) and his girlfriend Gina (Asian) and I were talking and she remarked how glad she was that I had related to her simply as a person since meeting her, and not “an Asian”.
As always, that caught me off guard. It really hadn’t occurred to me to do anything else. I mean, yes, she was Asian, but so what? It just never occurred to me that was a RELEVANT, DEEPLY IMPORTANT fact about WHO SHE WAS.

Because it wasn’t and it isn’t.
But the Left is trying to bring about a “racial awakening” where everyone has to “see race” always and everywhere.

And it may be working. If my lifelong color-blindness has been unconsciously disrupted … that’s not good.
My psyche has been affected to the point where, like my former college friend, I’ve started to notice the “Unnecessary Negro” trope in movies and tv. It bothers me. The fact I’ve been FORCED to NOTICE it bothers me. I don’t like it.
I doubt there would be any danger of RL bleed-over into, say, my classroom, because that isn’t about “casting” (well, at the University level, it kind of is, but that’s another story)—any student in my class ISN’T unnecessary, so there can’t be an “Unnecessary Negro” there.
I suppose I’ll end with a question:

Have any of you, or How many of you, have found the relentless neo-Racism of the Woke starting to *affect* how you see/think about race—in spite of yourself?
I *hate* Critical Race Theory. I oppose it. I think it is false and pernicious.

And yet, it’s had subtle effects on me, which I also hate.

I shouldn’t be surprised. The Master warned me:

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Eve Keneinan 𝛗☦️ن

Eve Keneinan 𝛗☦️ن Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @EveKeneinan

25 Mar
Carl seems to have gotten past this: which is good, since he has *never* been a moral subjectivist, but thought he was (a common state among moderns).

PREMIUM: Ethical Knowledge via @lotuseaters_com
@lotuseaters_com It’s a premium podcast and I’m not a premium member, so I didn’t see the whole thing, but it looks like he’s also starting to bump into the Moral Argument for God.

Give him a few more years and we’ll see.
@lotuseaters_com On naturalism, one could claim a “thin” kind of moral objectivity, namely, that there are things that are naturally good for human beings, but one cannot capture NORMATIVITY.

People who laud things like “human well-being” have NOTHING to say to one who doesn’t care about that.
Read 8 tweets
24 Mar
“Traditional atheism” is the position that there is no God.

So far from “very valid” a position is it to hold, it is so manifestly irrational and indefensible that it has been completely abandoned. Why do you *think* (almost) no one today attempts to PROVE there is no God?
“Atheism” has very nearly been abandoned as PHILOSOPHICAL POSITION—even as it has grown as an EXISTENTIAL STANCE. 99.9% of “atheists” these days no longer are confident they can DEMONSTRATE that there is no God.

Which is wise, since they CANNOT.
There are really only three or four arguments for atheism, and none of them go through.
Read 12 tweets
24 Mar
Note the fallacy here. Let’s call it the “Skin in the Game Fallacy.”

In many practical endeavors, having “skin in the game” is important. In other endeavors, it is a negative. Error to present it only as GOOD.

Counterexample: Judges should not have “skin in the game"
When a judge has “skin in the game,” e.g. when he or she is called upon to decide a matter in which he or she is PERSONALLY IMPLICATED — it is his or her duty to RECUSE him- or herself from the case.

“Skin in the game” DISTORTS OBJECTIVE JUDGMENT.
So it isn’t TRUE in all cases to say “This affects me personally, so my judgment is more clear!”

In MANY cases, the opposite is true. A personal involvement DISTORTS clear and objective judgment.
Read 5 tweets
24 Mar
Another half-truth.

Being a “marginalized” person makes you, in some respects, more clever than a non-marginalized person, but it also makes you BAD.

Oppression causes vice. That’s one of the MAIN REASONS it is EVIL.
If this CRT nonsense were true, it would follow that white people and men and ALL “oppressor groups” have DONE A HUGE FAVOR TO THE MARGINALIZED BY MARGINALIZING THEM—because THIS HAS MADE THEM VIRTUOUS.

It also follows, since oppressing someone BENEFITS THEM, WE SHOULD DO THAT.
Let me repeat that:

IF OPPRESSING PEOPLE MAKES THEM GOOD, THEN WE SHOULD KEEP DOING THAT, BECAUSE BY OPPRESSING PEOPLE WE ARE BENEFITTING THEM.
Read 6 tweets
24 Mar
A half-truth. Human genetic differences are certainly real. The fact that black people have more melanin in their skin than white people is certainly biological — what’s conventional is any *exact* category which cuts off a part of human genetic space as “black” or “white.”
In other words, “black people” and “white people” are not NATURAL KINDS. They are just rough areas within human genetic space, enough so you can say “over here” and “over there.” They have irreducibly fuzzy margins.
Race is thus biological and “real” in a LOW RESOLUTION way. Enough, though, that we can associate race with some important biological facts — like greater risk of sickle cell anemia in black people.

What’s TRUE is that race (other than for a few things like that) ISN’T IMPORTANT
Read 4 tweets
22 Mar
#2 and #3 are identical for some reason. Asking the same question twice ≠ asking two different questions. 🤷🏻‍♀️
As to #2/#3, for moral realism to be held RATIONALLY, there must be a sufficient ground-reason for moral truths & this would be something equivalent to the Platonic Good. But if there is something equivalent to the Good (the Ṛta, the Tao, the Λόγος, etc.), this will be θεῖος.
Read 9 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!