Seeing a lot of hot takes on this. Mine is lukewarm by comparison.
I think content that is packaged in the garb of, and aiming for, *persuasion* should be very careful not to take its rhetorical cues from academic/activist spaces.
washingtonpost.com/video/the-lily…
I think content that is packaged in the garb of, and aiming for, *persuasion* should be very careful not to take its rhetorical cues from academic/activist spaces.
washingtonpost.com/video/the-lily…
A lot of what this says about society's structural racial dynamics is correct and innocuously so. The idea that whites—their customs, prerogatives—have functioned like a kind of default in society, and unwittingly perpetuating this impedes and even harm nonwhites, is easy to get.
The problem with offerings like this is they operate with a braindead incapacity to grasp how the presentational decision to build out this message via the frame of demonizing "whiteness" is hugely inimical to the very cause being championed.
A maddening spectacle is when activist chuds think they can churn out a bunch of content whose message gets received as "whiteness, which covers your skin like a glowing aura of negative energy, is all around you, killing everything it touches" and expect that to effect change.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
