Study: You may be more racist than you think

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by alphagamzetagam

I said that white people shouldn't have been offended by "snowflake" or "barbie" but maybe more charged terms like "whitie" or "cracker" because snowflake and barbie aren't as charged. People white people haven't been oppressed (and I think I meant oppressed by people using that language against them).

So I guess it's not a straight up question of whether or not they've been oppressed.

The moral of that point was that there's not a history of racial abuse to go from for white people, so terms aren't as charged as they are for minorities, be it black, hispanic, asian, purple, etc.

I'm not in the business of telling anyone what they can be offended by. The whites who are offended by such references have every right to be offended. This isn't an instance of "karma is a bitch" or "get over it."

The discussion was about whether such comments constitute "racism." The point is that "offense" does not imply "racism" and "racism" does not require "offense." That also applies to some instances where minorities claim racism. It applies in this discussion because of the power dynamic that makes racism a structure that changes in form but does not go away.

This is why I don't call people and individual-level experiences "racist." That individual-level application leads to "racism" being used too loosely.