Is it okay to generalize about a racial or gender group on the basis of something that is true of a mere plurality of its members? A majority? A supermajority? For many the answer is *that depends on the standard's implications for the ideological point I'm trying to make.*
So, for example, it's objectionable to be cisnormative, because it erases the small percentage of people who are trans; and Model Minority Myth is objectionable; but speaking of white people as possessing wealth privilege is fine. The logic is wildly inconsistent.
The correct insight that *Asian Americans are wealthy* obscures and elides e.g. *recent Hmong immigrants* and the correct insight that *white people have family wealth privilege* elides e.g. white Appalachian kids born into deeply indebted families are very similar.
Yet it tends to be one coalition that raises one point and another that raises the other

• • •

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

Keep Current with Conor Friedersdorf

Conor Friedersdorf 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!


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 @conor64

29 May
I get the market for mass market "macrobrews" and for "microbrews" and even for stuff in between but I don't get this "limited edition": Image
Nor do I get this "pure" Coors Light. What's in the other stuff?! Image
But apparently it's a thing because there's competition Image
Read 4 tweets
24 May
This @benyt article about dysfunction in public radio reminds me that I've been meaning to pose a question about ReplyAll and its return-after-controversy episode:…
In the episode they say they spent *two months* drilling down and reflecting on what went wrong (ostensibly! I add) with their piece on Bon Appetit. But then they... don't ever level with the audience.
The most we get is the assertion that 1) journalists should always ask, "Am I the right one to tell this story?" and the claim that 2) they didn't ask or adequately interrogate if they were the right ones to tell *that* story.

Both 1 and 2 were glaringly underdeveloped.
Read 9 tweets
22 May
Apropos this convo between @benyt and @WesleyLowery on the convention of "objectivity," inspired by the unjust firing of an Associated Press reporter, I'm reminded of an obscure but powerful example of how that conceit has gone wrong that I'm privy to for personal reasons. 1/x
It will surprise some of you to learn that in 2011 some Occupy Wall Street protesters put a critique of Goldman Sachs that I wrote on a protest sign and chanted my words on the streets of New York City. 2/x
The sentence in question, describing a dubious deal Goldman did, was, shall we say, amusingly unwieldy--had I known it might appear on a sign I'd have done one more draft.

Nevertheless, you can watch the protest video here:
Read 8 tweets
3 May
Actually, the whole conference is online now, so a quick thread. Here's the always excellent and nuanced Randall Kennedy on race and freedom of expression
The next session was "What are the empirical facts about lack of intellectual diversity in academia and what are the causes of existing imbalances?"

"To what degree is this a problem?" panel

Read 6 tweets
29 Apr
At The Wedge, it's rare to see someone turn right. After all, if you turn right your hurtling toward a rock jetty. The day I was there, I saw just one person turn right all afternoon. A look at his ride in twelve tweets, starting here:
At first the ride seemed uneventful. But at The Wedge, there's the wave coming in from the ocean and the mini-wave bouncing back off the jetty. Here he is looking at that mini-wave:
It bears mentioning that he's moving pretty fast here.
Read 12 tweets
19 Apr
Here's my article urging that we investigate police killings in the same way that we investigate plane crashes.… In this thread I'll engage a critique from the left: Image
First, there is a bit of common ground here, in that the writer suggests some reforms I've repeatedly advocated. For example:… Nothing about these reforms is incompatible with adding an NTSB-like approach.
Second, the idea that there is an expert consensus for the writer's views is simply incorrect. Police killings are a hugely complicated phenomenon, criminologists argue a lot about them, treating them all as "murders" is simply false, and the writer doesn't even mention
Read 7 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!