Unfortunately, one of the first thoughts i have is if the article might have a different tone or angle if the principal was simply "white" and not latino?
Yasha literally starts the conversation by saying "I hate this term" when referring to peak woke. Do you think we should not have a name for the fairly recent collective decision for many on the left to speak in new and special language about anything related to race, religion, or gender identity (i.e. Antiracism & equity; microaggressions; birthing person, etc)?
Funny, becaue when someone can discount someone this easily, they lose all credibility for me. I just assume they're one more unprincipled know-nothing who recites the pieties du jour without any ability to argue for them.
@@MikeM-uy6qp Yes, it's easy to discount someone who uses a word they don't understand and just repeats it because it's become a meme in the culture wars.
“People of color” is used instead of 'non-white' because 'non-white' frames whiteness as the default or standard. In contrast, 'people of color' acknowledges the diverse experiences and identities of various racial and ethnic groups without centering whiteness as the norm.
@@tomspaghetti But by using “people of color” you are just announcing to a specific in-group that you know the "correct" terminology. It is obviously referring to the same group of people no matter if you call them POC, non-white, Melanin-Rich Individuals. Normal people will wonder why “colored people” is seen as an old-fashioned, “problematic” term, while switching the order of words around is racially sensitive. Those who actually spend time around diverse groups of people will quickly learn that most people care little about using this new sensitive language.
Unfortunately, one of the first thoughts i have is if the article might have a different tone or angle if the principal was simply "white" and not latino?
As soon as someone uses the word 'woke' they lose all credibility.
Yasha literally starts the conversation by saying "I hate this term" when referring to peak woke. Do you think we should not have a name for the fairly recent collective decision for many on the left to speak in new and special language about anything related to race, religion, or gender identity (i.e. Antiracism & equity; microaggressions; birthing person, etc)?
@@Suavemcool Those are fringe, not the 'many on the left'.
Funny, becaue when someone can discount someone this easily, they lose all credibility for me. I just assume they're one more unprincipled know-nothing who recites the pieties du jour without any ability to argue for them.
@@MikeM-uy6qp Yes, it's easy to discount someone who uses a word they don't understand and just repeats it because it's become a meme in the culture wars.
@@squatch545 Not fringe. Those ideas and language are standard in most major American universities, the New York Times, VICE, CNN, NPR, etc.
You make your entire living off “woke” along with the million other reactionary people.
So I get why you’re skeptical
BONERS
Why is this guy using the term "people of color" instead of "non-white"?
“People of color” is used instead of 'non-white' because 'non-white' frames whiteness as the default or standard. In contrast, 'people of color' acknowledges the diverse experiences and identities of various racial and ethnic groups without centering whiteness as the norm.
@@tomspaghetti But by using “people of color” you are just announcing to a specific in-group that you know the "correct" terminology. It is obviously referring to the same group of people no matter if you call them POC, non-white, Melanin-Rich Individuals.
Normal people will wonder why “colored people” is seen as an old-fashioned, “problematic” term, while switching the order of words around is racially sensitive. Those who actually spend time around diverse groups of people will quickly learn that most people care little about using this new sensitive language.