(cache) OilNmashedKeefBluntがWhite students barred from funded Ryerson Students Union student group event: Group says students were kicked out for being whiteについて記入したコメント

I'm comparing the two because other people are comparing the two, in some delusional attempt to prove that white people are the real victims of racism.

The SAE chant was blatantly racist. They used racial slurs, they referenced lynching, etc. It was racism against black people for being black.

This group was not racist. It was discriminatory, sure. But not racist. They were not discriminated against because they were white, it was because they were coming to a support group for victims of racism not as victims of racism, but as spectators, hoping to report on what is normally confidential and private.

It could have been educational, but you'd have to be pretty entitled to think that your desire to be educated trumps everyone else's desire for privacy and safety. Especially when there are plenty of other opportunities and ways to lean about racism, some of which are put on by this same group.

[–]Gawgba 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 19 時間前 (4子コメント)

[–]lifeonthegrid -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント 19 時間前 (3子コメント)

[–]Gawgba 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 19 時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]lifeonthegrid -3 ポイント-2 ポイント-1 ポイント 19 時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]Gawgba 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 18 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]Gawgba 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 19 時間前 (7子コメント)

[–]lifeonthegrid -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント 19 時間前 (6子コメント)

[–]Gawgba 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 19 時間前 (5子コメント)

[–]lifeonthegrid -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント 19 時間前 (4子コメント)

[–]Gawgba 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 19 時間前 (3子コメント)

[–]lifeonthegrid -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント 18 時間前 (2子コメント)

Yes, I think white people can experience racism. I also think this isn't a case of racism.

This is not just an event. This is a support group. It's purpose is to first and foremost help people who deal with a specific problem. Part of that is being able to speak openly and freely, without free of judgement. The person in charge is trying to preserve that atmosphere. So when she's sees two people that are

*a. new * b. not the normal demographic for the group

she has to make a call. Does she trust that these two newcomers are here to participate, not say anything and let them in, potentially jeopardizing the group's purpose and their faith in the program? Or does she ask them if they belong in the support group, which might be momentarily uncomfortable, but important in the maintaining the integrity and the purpose of the group? She chooses the latter. Turns out they aren't here to participate in the support group. They're here to write an article about the support group. Since they're not here to participate in the support group, she asks them to leave. Not because of their race, but because as spectators and people who haven't experienced racism, their presence is a detriment to the function of the group.

They were identified as different from the rest of the support group based on their race, in the same way someone with an open bottle of booze would stand out in an AA meeting or someone with a full head of hair would stand out in an alopecia support meeting. They were then denied access not because of their race, but because they weren't there to participate in the support group.

I used the example of an eating disorder supporting group because to me, it hammers home that the ultimate reason they were dismissed is that they admitted they didn't face the problem the support group was there to discuss.

If you want to discuss how they came to the conclusion that they didn't belong, fine. But to argue a support group is wrong for keeping out people who don't deal with the problem is silly.

[–]Gawgba 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 18 時間前 (1子コメント)

They were identified as different from the rest of the support group based on their race, in the same way someone with an open bottle of booze would stand out in an AA meeting or someone with a full head of hair would stand out in an alopecia support meeting.

So showing up white at this event is the equivalent of having an open bottle of booze at an AA meeting? Convenient.

If you want to discuss how they came to the conclusion that they didn't belong, fine.

Yeah, that's actually a major part of this discussion. You acknowledge that white people can experience racism yet somehow when a white person shows up at a "Racialized Students’ Collective" it's somehow akin to a person with a full head of hair showing up at an alopecia support group? Why are you even using loose analogies when the actual situation is so explicit?

1) There is a meeting of the "Racialized Students’ Collective" group 2) Two white students show up and they (and they alone, apparently) are asked questions to determine whether they have right to be there 3) They are kicked out

Imagine this: I call a meeting of the Student Entrepreneurs group. Two black students show up. I ask them (and only them) whether they are actually entrepreneurs. If they can't prove they are entrepreneurs I kick them out. I claim this is because usually there are no black attendees (they're not 'the normal demographic for the group'). You cool with that?

[–]lifeonthegrid 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 18 時間前 (0子コメント)

No asked them if they were 'actually" the victims of racism. Nor did anyone force them prove to prove anything. They were asked the simple question "Have you been racialized" and they answered no. A yes or no question is hardly an unreasonable burden of proof.

White people can experience racism. That doesn't mean they show up frequently to racism support groups. Chinese people can be interested in Polish culture, that doesn't mean that a Chinese person showing up to a group of all Polish people wouldn't stand out.

Here's the equivalent example. Two black students show up to the Student Entrepreneurs. Your group has been all-white for as long you've been running it, and it's the middle of March, well past time for most new members. You ask them "Are you here for the Student Entrepreneurs group?". They say "No. We're not entrepreneurs and have never been". Student Entrepreneurs is about open discussion and having people openly talk about their experiences as entrepreneurs, which becomes difficult when people who aren't entrepreneurs are around. On the basis of them admitting that they don't want to participate and their presence being detrimental to your stated goal of entrepreneurship, you ask them to leave.

[–]Pumpkinpilot 5 ポイント6 ポイント7 ポイント 1 日前 (10子コメント)

[–]lifeonthegrid -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント 1 日前 (9子コメント)

[–]Pumpkinpilot 5 ポイント6 ポイント7 ポイント 1 日前 (8子コメント)

[–]lifeonthegrid 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 1 日前 (7子コメント)

[–]Pumpkinpilot 3 ポイント4 ポイント5 ポイント 21 時間前 (4子コメント)

[–]lifeonthegrid -3 ポイント-2 ポイント-1 ポイント 21 時間前 (3子コメント)

[–]Pumpkinpilot 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 5 時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]lifeonthegrid 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 5 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]jpaul3211 -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント 20 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]alohadave 6 ポイント7 ポイント8 ポイント 23 時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]lifeonthegrid -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント 23 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]SirSnafu92 -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント 20 時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 12 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]thrillerv -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント 23 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]obviousMetal -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント 21 時間前 (0子コメント)

コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

news

調停者