LaneSig, I appreciate your candor and the time you took to respond.
Your explanation highlights what you feel is insensitive, and what you feel is not
so insensitive in your experience and past tradition that you feel it necessitates an apology or rejection of your tradition. I get it – not judging – your past (or present) support of past images/mascots did not involve any intention to disrespect a race of people – then or now.
Somewhere a boundary surely exists between what is reasonable, in terms of sensitivity observance, and what may be a tick too far in terms of hyper-sensitive vigilance. As you point out – an image of a savage is different from that of a Seminole.
Which brings me your comment:
Quote:
|
-I do believe that the people who made comments about 'watermelon' don't understand the way the stereotype has been used to hurt African-Americans.
|
I cannot speak for other members, but those comments were clearly in response to mine concerning the anecdote about watermelon at a reception being insensitive,
not the image on the t-shirt. There is nothing racist or insensitive about serving watermelon, IMO, even though the AA executive felt differently and chose to allow watermelon to ruin an event held in his honor.
As I indicated in my previous comments, such a reaction to serving watermelon is an example of sensitivity taken a tick too far, and IMO, that was the essence of the watermelon comments which followed. I don’t see anything to be apologetic for there – failure to recognize watermelon, on its own, as racially insensitive, is not a white privilege blind spot.
And I’m not apologetic for
that view.
Thanks again – I think we probably agree more than we disagree.
Threaded Mode
