My D2 and I have been discussing this. I am not willing to accept a language change where “power” is inserted into the definition. You don’t get to change the meaning of a word just because you want to have a more granular or nuanced discussion of the topic. The problem with substituting “discrimination” or “prejudice” is that they can encompass other things than race (for example, handicapped people may be subject to them as well).
In our discussions we have been using “Racism” with a capital R to describe systemic racism that includes the power element, and little r racism for individual acts based solely on race without a power imbalance (like this thread’s topic).
I am pleased that we as a society are having a more nuanced discussion about this, that is for sure. But I disagree with anyone of any race putting a race litmus test on roommates, friends, etc – just because it is not illegal, that doesn’t make it right or productive in trying to move forward.
While I think that the roommates are entitled to choosing whomever they want as their roommate, I still think that the advertisement was most likely driven by racist attitudes (even acknowledging the argument for self-preservation). I live at home (and therefore don’t have experience with roommates) but I don’t think I would decide not to room with someone because they are of a different race. Of course, I know that it’s different for me, being white and in the majority.
And while I understand that interactions across race can sometimes be tense, uncomfortable, or hurtful, if roommates of different skin colors come together with the mutual attitude that mending race relations is a GOOD thing, then lots of learning, growing, and healing will happen. Unfortunately, in this case, the goal was clearly quite opposite. So while I understand that it is possible for the advertisement to have been written with just motives, I think it was certainly aimed in the wrong direction.
^ More like gay people saying they don’t want straight roommates. I know several people who were worried about being paired with homophobes as roommates.
“My D2 and I have been discussing this. I am not willing to accept a language change where “power” is inserted into the definition. You don’t get to change the meaning of a word just because you want to have a more granular or nuanced discussion of the topic.”
I too an uncomfortable that all of a sudden some people arbitrarily decided that racism can only emanate from a position of power and that they have so decreed and so boom, there it is. It’s known as making stuff up out of whole cloth.
As a gay person, I would personally prefer that people were that blunt. Better than finding out later. ymmv.
As for above, I think the “I don’t want to live around any white people” was in response to a question asking why the ad specified POC only. So it wasn’t in the original post.
It is not “all of a sudden” or a recent thing. Some activists decades ago were trying to make the same definition of “racism”, usually to justify or excuse their own or their political allies’ actual racism.
@doschicos, now that we have defined it that way, usually in conversation we know which type the other person means. But yes, occasionally one of us will say “big R” or “little r” to clarify.
@STEM2017 I think there’s a considerable difference between a college excluding an entire group of people from attending, and three students deciding what living arrangements they would be most comfortable with.
Seems that, if the nuance needs to be made explicit, phrases like “racism among those in power”, “racism against non-white people”, “racism common in society [or an aspect of society]”, etc. would be a much clearer way of capturing the nuance, rather than trying to redefine “racism” in a way that only white people can be racist.
Of course, it may be that such attempts at redefining “racism” are related to the apparent general attitude that racism is always extremely evil and/or vicious, rather than there being many shades of racism, including in how much harmful effect it causes to others. So the activists in question naturally do not want their own petty (or not-so-petty) prejudices to be called “racism”.
》》 one can be uncomfortable around someone of another race for a number of reasons and not necessarily view that race as “inferior” or theirs as “superior.”《《
Is this right granted to white police officers? Just curious.
Re: gay roommates. I can see why someone would have a problem with that, even without a religious standpoint or anything. (I’m a female.) I would feel a lot more uncomfortable being in various states of undress (like wearing a t-shirt without a bra) around a female who finds the female body sexually attractive, same as I would around a straight guy I was not attempting to be intimate with. But someone’s race doesn’t have a lot to do with sexuality.
