Support NeoGAF

[Secret Fawful]

Amazing post, Messofanego.

I wanted to make a post about the Portland March and their lack of inclusiveness since I found out new information about that.

So, the Portland march against Trump did indeed lose the support of the NAACP after the leaders refused to talk about race, LGBTQ rights, or other politically-charged issues such as discrimination toward Muslims.

The NAACP of Portland announced Wednesday the group has removed its endorsement of the Women's March on Portland, a protest of President-elect Donald Trump scheduled for Jan. 21, the day after the presidential inauguration.

"I didn't want to be part of the march if it was going to be a white-woman kumbaya march," Jo Ann Hardesty, the president of the group, tells WW.

This is, sadly, typical of PDX liberalism, and the city's activism has long needed a shot in the leg.

Then it got one, or at least a step towards one, in the form of Margaret Jacobsen, a black woman and activist. (who also didn't vote, but instead had her kids vote for Hillary in her place, so she's part of the problem, but what she actually has to say about the problems with the Portland march and white feminism are correct, and her efforts to fix those problems are at least admirable, which is the point of the post overall)

The Women's March on Portland has replaced its leadership, and tells WW that it is now giving a larger platform to women of color.

Margaret Jacobsen, a writer and an activist, joined on as a Portland march organizer last Friday after national organizers sought out a way to diversify the leadership of Portland's group.

Jacobsen says she's working to turn the march around in the next two weeks.

"We're changing it so that people feel welcome and know that they are safe here," Jacobsen tells WW. Plans now include a roster of speakers and MC's for the event that will be majority of people of color.

The Portland march was originally organized by half a dozen women from Eastern Oregon, says Jacobsen, and women of color had been blocked from the local group's Facebook page after asking whether they were welcome.

Jacobsen was not able to get the NAACP back, but she also didn't push for that, because she agreed with their reasons for withdrawing.

Jacobsen says she's been in touch with Jo Ann Hardesty, the president of the group, telling her:

"I was going to ask you to speak, but I want to honor the choice not to support this march," she says.

Yet Hardesty and the NAACP have yet to rejoin the march. Hardesty says she's aware of the change in leadership, but the damage had been done.

"I felt it was important that we not miss this teachable moment about what role of race and religion and class were playing in pulling this march together," she says.

Interview with Margaret Jacobsen about the protests and her efforts in making them inclusive for everyone. I'm also putting an additional quote by Jo Ann Hardesty because I agree with her on the damage done by the march in the first place, and think it's important contextually.

As WW reported last week, the Portland branch of the NAACP removed its support for the march Jan. 11, even after Jacobsen took control. Branch president Jo Ann Hardesty said the march had been irreparably harmed by the previous organizers' failure to include discussions of racial discrimination, plans for a Muslim registry, and the plight of immigrants and refugees.

"Putting a black woman's face at the beginning of the march doesn't fundamentally change the reason we withdrew our support," Hardesty says. "It's always been the case that if somebody suffers a racist incident, you're just supposed to suck it up and then, for the sake of unity, let's all join hands and pretend it didn't happen. I'm just at a place where I don't think that's healthy or wise anymore."

Some choice quotes from the article by Jacobsen:

I knew there was a women's march taking place in Washington, [D.C.,] and I was really doubtful about it. Most women I knew who were going were white women. I felt like that was enough for me to know that it probably wasn't for me. And they weren't addressing people of color, queer people, trans people. It was just women marching.

On what happened to alienate people of color during preparations for the march:

It was mostly the refusal to [have] open dialogue about if people of color were safe or if they were welcome, if there were steps being taken to make them feel like this march was also for them. Also, [organizers said] no political signs were allowed. So there were no "Black Lives Matter" signs allowed in the march.

In talking with the original organizers, there was just confusion: "I'm not racist, so I don't know why I need to have this dialogue. I said 'all women.'"

It needs to go a step further. You need to specify, "I understand you're feeling oppressed in this space, and I'm going to validate that. We want you there."

On the original organizer:

I tried to say it's very important people know they can come to a march, that they know their voices will be amplified, you can't ignore that. And she was like, "I care about all women, and I'm not racist."

We have a definition of racism that was taught to us. We were told that we're in post-racial America, and we had Obama. People are like, "I'm not actively being racist." It's not always understood that it's part of the makeup of our country, that our systems have been built off of racism, that our country was built off of racism.

On Clinton supporters' diet racism and Trump supporters' overt racism:

Trump supporters say, "I don't like this group of people." Hillary supporters are like, "People are all equal. I don't want to admit some people are being murdered at a faster rate. And I want to look past color."

Let me educate you, so we can move forward together in fighting Trump supporters. I really, really, really believe in educating people who think they're not racist because sometimes their racism is even scarier.

Most of us don't care for oppression Olympics. We would simply like to be validated where we are and have help and support so we can move forward. So we don't have to have fears daily.

On the NAACP withdrawing support:

What was decided was really good for our city to see, just because Portland's history with race is so horrendous and horrifying. And I think it's getting to the point where people are done with the silencing and the liberal nonsense of "We're all the same, so let's not talk about the uncomfortable things." I was so supportive of what Jo Ann was doing. She in turn was supportive of me and thanked me for taking over.

What she wants people to learn:

I would love for them to learn that people are done pandering to whiteness. And that if we're going to be part of something, we actually have to be included in the planning. You don't just get to bring people of color in and check it off your list.

I want people to learn from this how it is possible to take something that isn't inclusive and make it so. It's really important to me to have an example. We don't have to settle for what Portland has given us and expected us to be.

I think she's an idiot for not voting, but at the very least I am glad to see someone handling the march in Portland now who will put issues of discrimination, police brutality, LGBTQ rights, etc. forward and will fight against white supremacy within white feminism.

 

[UCBooties]

Also, I don't give a fuck if you marched. If ya ass can vote and don't in 2018, you can march ya ass the fuck away.

Oh shit, it's almost like marching in a protest could be a pathway to wider political engagement...

Nah... fuck 'em. Right?

 

[bengraven]

I keep reading WW as Wonder Woman and am not sure I should be angry at her inaction or assume she's acting out of self interest because she's wonder.

 

[Angelus Errare]

How about we listen to some actual women instead of all these dudes in here trying to defend the honor of white women?

https://www.facebook.com/AddOilComics/posts/1848172338736986

I was actually looking for her tweets specifically but didn't know if I should screenshot all of them or just straight link them, so thank you for posting this. She gets it and nails it on the head completely.

 

[Zoc]

WTH at that Portland march. BLM has to be front and center in this. All oppressed groups have to be in this (and that includes the poor country whites that Trump is going to screw like everyone else).

 

[TurnipFritters]

WTH at that Portland march. BLM has to be front and center in this. All oppressed groups have to be in this (and that includes the poor country whites that Trump is going to screw like everyone else).

I for one am shocked that Portland is actually super racist.

 

[Faustek]

This thread is making me sad indeed.
Maybe because I'm in the other side of the fence I can see it just being a repeat of Fittstim(pussy riot) in Sweden 1990s. It wasn't worth asking if a brother could have a bone this was WW only and the promise of a trickle down effect to WoC and maybe us... Anyway screw that I don't want to talk about it now but seeing that Native Indians recap in those tweets rings all to true. Hopefully the ones uncomfortable by it don't run away or ignore it and more people stay and learn than ignore it.
Because one thing is true, we're all in this together even if you are a white woman you are still a nigger* of the world.

*still hate that ugly word.

 

[Angelus Errare]

Wish I could say I was shocked about Portland but that'd be a lie. This feels pretty apt

I for one am shocked that Portland is actually super racist.

I see you saying this monotonically while staring at someone with a blank expression ala your avatar and just started laughing my ass off.

 

[Ratrat]

Well, its true. Reminds me of when I read his: http://theslot.jezebel.com/thank-you-but-none-necessary-d-l-1788724170 Written by a white woman, it seems a bit embarassing in retrospect.

 

[paragonpro]

The march was great but Blaming an entire segmeant of people (in this case white women) for trumps election seems fucked up beyond belife. I know a lot of caucasion females who went to washington to march. Cutting what they have to say out because they are white seems counter productive to that cause.

 

[Vermillion]

How about we listen to some actual women instead of all these dudes in here trying to defend the honor of white women?

https://www.facebook.com/AddOilComics/posts/1848172338736986

This sign, just like allllll the articles on white fragility, will receive a positive reaction from the people already primed towards that reaction.

For all the people that don't agree, they will continue to distance themselves, and this is how you end up with more Trump.

But at this point, it seems like people care more about their message than winning over people and winning elections... which is fine, I guess.

 

[Infinite]

This sign, just like allllll the articles on white fragility, will receive a positive reaction from the people already primed towards that reaction.

For all the people that don't agree, they will continue to distance themselves, and this is how you end up with more Trump.

But at this point, it seems like people care more about their message than winning over people and winning elections... which is fine, I guess.

this is really dumb and people in this thread should stop saying it.

 

[Vermillion]

this is really dumb and people in this thread should stop saying it.

How?

 

[Infinite]

How?

I said how dozens of times in this thread. If discourse around racism and intersectionality is enough to trigger people to take their ball home and vote against their own interests then there's nothing a change in language on our part will do. We have to talk about this changing words isn't going to make a difference for those hypothetical people. The problem isn't how we talk about them it's that were talking about it at all. Also, you're completely absolving those hypothetical people of any sort of responsibility.

Even think about what you're saying in a larger sense. This isn't why people vote republican and why democrats lost this election. It's not even close to one of the top reasons.

 

[old]

I sympathize with her struggles but the Left just lost two (and soon to be all three) branches of government. Now is not the time to be kicking out allies. The Left needs all the voters it can get or it's not just going be 8 years of Trump but 8 years of GOP supermajority.

 

[Yoritomo]

White women and white men are dealing with criticism of their dedication and commitment to progressive causes involving the issues of people of color.

White privilege at its most basic is the ability to define yourself, instead of mostly being defined by others.

This, not all men, not all women, not all white people shit exists because it's something white people have had the freedom to not have to deal with.

If you're a person of color you're automatically pigeonholed.

My only criticism of the messaging is that instead of educating, the stones and artifacts of oppression and pigeonholing minorities that have rolled down hill because they were ignored by white people, are now being tossed back up the mountain.

Yes you're going to wake up some people, but the stones are going to roll all the way back down again.

And frankly I don't know what to do. How the hell do you address white fragility? I honestly don't know.

Because even what I just wrote sets up white people as a protected class to not offend, because otherwise all the bullshit is going to roll downhill again, so that's clearly not a solution.

 

[Stinkles]

I never claimed I wasn't generalizing, I'm speaking in very macro terms. If you're looking for a #NotAll____ response from me, you're not getting it.

I said what I said.

Don't worry you're in good company. Lots of people on gaf paint themselves into ridiculous corners because they're bad at communicating.

 

[ExVicis]

The march was great but Blaming an entire segmeant of people (in this case white women) for trumps election seems fucked up beyond belife. I know a lot of caucasion females who went to washington to march. Cutting what they have to say out because they are white seems counter productive to that cause.

This is my issue. I'm not even saying uncomfortable things don't need to be talked about because they do. Everything revolving around Trump is an uncomfortable topic that needs to be discussed and not a single one shouldn't get attention.

My issue is instead these kind of rapid fire emotionally motivated remarks just shot into the aether at particularly no one like this.

These kinds of things aren't helping anyone. There is nothing constructive about that kind of comment. Honestly though I'm not even bothered by how it says how White Women aren't the allies of Women of Color, but I'm more bothered by how it doesn't go a step further to say how they or anyone can change that.

 

[TurnipFritters]

I sympathize with her struggles but the Left just lost two (and soon to be all three) branches of government. Now is not the time to be kicking out allies. The Left needs all the voters it can get or it's not just going be 8 years of Trump but 8 years of GOP supermajority.

This is true, the left needs lots and lots of people to be actively engaged with politics at all levels of government now, but at the same time you can (and likely should) make an equally compelling argument that since America is at such an important crossroads that white people need to suck it up and grow some thicker skin.

 

[Messofanego]

Amazing post, Messofanego.

I wanted to make a post about the Portland March and their lack of inclusiveness since I found out new information about that.

So, the Portland march against Trump did indeed lose the support of the NAACP after the leaders refused to talk about race, LGBTQ rights, or other politically-charged issues such as discrimination toward Muslims.



This is, sadly, typical of PDX liberalism, and the city's activism has long needed a shot in the leg.

Then it got one, or at least a step towards one, in the form of Margaret Jacobsen, a black woman and activist. (who also didn't vote, but instead had her kids vote for Hillary in her place, so she's part of the problem, but what she actually has to say about the problems with the Portland march and white feminism are correct, and her efforts to fix those problems are at least admirable, which is the point of the post overall)





Jacobsen was not able to get the NAACP back, but she also didn't push for that, because she agreed with their reasons for withdrawing.



Interview with Margaret Jacobsen about the protests and her efforts in making them inclusive for everyone. I'm also putting an additional quote by Jo Ann Hardesty because I agree with her on the damage done by the march in the first place, and think it's important contextually.



Some choice quotes from the article by Jacobsen:



On what happened to alienate people of color during preparations for the march:



On the original organizer:



On Clinton supporters' diet racism and Trump supporters' overt racism:



On the NAACP withdrawing support:



What she wants people to learn:



I think she's an idiot for not voting, but at the very least I am glad to see someone handling the march in Portland now who will put issues of discrimination, police brutality, LGBTQ rights, etc. forward and will fight against white supremacy within white feminism.

Yeah, I totally get NAACP not wanting to go back on their decision. This kind of colour-blind liberalism in Portland is woeful. It's too bad they wouldn't allow political signs like for BLM. Of course feminism is complex, it shouldn't be about just white women's struggles, but if you can't accomodate for others, then that's a disappointment. Best of wishes for Jacobsen moving forward, though.

 

[LotusHD]

Did anyone post this yet, the woman from the photo gave an interview:

http://www.theroot.com/woman-in-viral-photo-from-women-s-march-to-white-female-1791524613

 

[Whompa02]

edit: eh forget it. Not even worth getting into honestly.

I think all people should be informed of the concerns of millions of people, but you can't blame white women who support and protest just as hard as you, for other people with the same skin color...

 

[MikeyB]

What politics would you prefer be tackled?

Racist biases certainly need to be tackled. I think the questions are when and how and the answer is dependent on the severity of the racism and the other problems of the day.

My take on the context is:
1. Your electoral system just chose a leader who is grossly incompetent, immoral, and possibly stupid. This is a failure of the the party system and your media.

2. Your media is under attack.

3. Anti-intellectualism has political and media clout and is arguably now part of the executive.

4. Antagonistic racists (rather than people who are just blind to their biases about First Nations' clothing) have renewed political clout and sexist views seem to now be tolerated by many Americans as harmless banter.

5. A foreign power has influenced your election.

6. The executive is once again composed of people from the financial sector. The sector that threw America into recession, the sector that created a system that tanked other countries' economies, that fudged the Greek accounts and weakened the Euro area, and specifically, the big bank that profited from this chaos has staffed Cabinet again.

These are big problems. The march focused on 1 and 4 as I saw it. The point being, you are going to need sustained and united energy to address this mess. There is a real risk of fizzling out like the Occupy movement. Attacking others who share your concerns about 1-6 above because of a real, but less pressing issue (compare against 4) is going to reduce the effort put into 1-6.

As an aside, this sort of divisiveness is appsrently exactly what the Kremlin is aiming at throughout American political culture.

So save your powder, pick your battles, don't berate a sexist drunk driver about his sexism when you're careening into oncoming traffic - pick a phrase.

I honestly think that the concerns in the tweets are both legit concerns and pose a risk to sustained political actions.

 

[Messofanego]

Did anyone post this yet, the woman from the photo gave an interview:

http://www.theroot.com/woman-in-viral-photo-from-women-s-march-to-white-female-1791524613

Updated the OP, thanks.

 

[Kinyou]

Did anyone post this yet, the woman from the photo gave an interview:

http://www.theroot.com/woman-in-viral-photo-from-women-s-march-to-white-female-1791524613

Most were saying, “Not this white woman,” or “No one I know!” I’d say, “[Fifty-three percent] of white women voted for Trump. That means someone you know, someone who is in close community with you, voted for Trump. You need to organize your people.” And some people said, “Oh, I’m so ashamed.” Don’t be ashamed; organize your people.

That’s why the photo was such a great moment to capture, because it tells the story of white women in this moment wanting to just show up in a very superficial way and not wanting to do the hard work of making change, of challenging their own privilege. You’re here protesting, but don’t forget: The folks that you live with every single day—and probably some of the women that decided to come to the march—voted for Trump, made the decision to vote against self-interests to maintain their white supremacist way of life.

Didnt Hillary win Washington in an absolute landslide? Very possible that they really dont know any other women who voted for Trump.

 

[Kuroi Gogeta]

It feels like people are paying more attention to the tweets than to the point raised by the article OP posted, which is that you cannot expect women as a whole to think like a hivemind. They won't put issues related to gender above things like the economy or their fear of terrorism. People would rather eat a sweet, poisonous lie than sour truth. The man convinced people that despite having no detailed, organized and carefully thought out plans that he would assuage all their fears.

Women are not a monolith, and it's a very lofty expectation to think that women of all races, backgrounds, cultures, biological sex, etc. will come together for 1 goal. It's idealistic, not realistic. There are things that people will put above their gender or race or religion at the end of the day.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

divide and conquer

already divided and already conquered.

The point of those signs and tweets are to make people acutely aware that they have been conquered and to make sure everyone understand that action beyond the echo chamber marches are needed to get more people on board and not voting for sociopaths and authoritarians. To get the ones that voted the other way to reconsider next time around. Because if women are going to vote in the majority for someone like Trump and entirely against the self interests of themselves, their daughters and everyone of color, they have already been divided and conquered.

 

[Vermillion]

I said how dozens of times in this thread. If discourse around racism and intersectionality is enough to trigger people to take their ball home and vote against their own interests then there's nothing a change in language on our part will do. We have to talk about this changing words isn't going to make a difference for those hypothetical people. The problem isn't how we talk about them it's that were talking about it at all. Also, you're completely absolving those hypothetical people of any sort of responsibility.

Even think about what you're saying in a larger sense. This isn't why people vote republican and why democrats lost this election. It's not even close to one of the top reasons.

Okay, in this case you're looking to change people. I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about having the numbers to create change. You do that by bringing people together for one cause, not making them upset about marching with you. That's what gets these people to stay home or vote in a monster that at least makes them feel good about themselves.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Again, this is caring more about the message than amassing an army. And it's how you lose.

Last thing - even in the thing I commented on, the person holding the sign said nothing about deep intelligent discourse. There were the people who were actually going to think about the issue from the start, and the other people that straight up disagreed with her. So yeah, it's not like you're running a seminar - you're just dividing people you need to stand by you to achieve a single goal.

All the rest of this is preaching to your own choir.

 

[not psycho]

I said how dozens of times in this thread. If discourse around racism and intersectionality is enough to trigger people to take their ball home and vote against their own interests then there's nothing a change in language on our part will do. We have to talk about this changing words isn't going to make a difference for those hypothetical people. The problem isn't how we talk about them it's that were talking about it at all. Also, you're completely absolving those hypothetical people of any sort of responsibility.

Even think about what you're saying in a larger sense. This isn't why people vote republican and why democrats lost this election. It's not even close to one of the top reasons.

Agreed.

Seriously, you could change the words to something that might initially seem "nicer", but after it started being used for a while (including being used as an insult sometimes, because that is inevitable) it would acquire all the connotations that people disliked about the original term. The fact is, there are things that are painful to connect with, but we still have to connect to them. So the main thing is, people have to learn to deal with that.

But one thing I think would help is trying to make it clear that feelings themselves aren't being demonized. Letting people be human beings. It isn't discomfort, or fragility, or pain, that is the enemy in itself is it? Only when a person shuts down over it. Or silences someone else.

So personally, I have no problem with the sign in the OP. And as others have mentioned, I bet most of the people at the march didn't have a problem with it. But in itself, I don't think there is anything wrong if your feelings are hurt by it. That's ok too, as long as it doesn't cause you to disconnect.

For the tweet, I do think it jokingly belittles the women who marched, in addition to making its point. But it's still quite mild and partially just an attempt at humor, doesn't deserve any more than a short round of boos before moving on, and definitely shouldn't be generalized. We will always get a false impression of division if we look for bad examples so we can generalize them.

 

[Infinite]

Okay, in this case you're looking to change people. I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about having the numbers to create change. You do that by bringing people together for one cause, not making them upset about marching with you. That's what gets these people to stay home or vote in a monster that at least makes them feel good about themselves.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Again, this is caring more about the message than amassing an army. And it's how you lose.

Last thing - even in the thing I commented on, the person holding the sign said nothing about deep intelligent discourse. There were the people who were actually going to think about the issue from the start, and the other people that straight up disagreed with her. So yeah, it's not like you're running a seminar - you're just dividing people you need to stand by you to achieve a single goal.

All the rest of this is preaching to your own choir.

Choir? But it seems like you're talking about people who have either attended the march or would be attending the march which is the fucking choir! I would imagine the women attending these marches would be the not only the ones the sign is directed to but the only ones who has the ability to take it constructively. I don't imagine the women attending these rallies to be fickle enough to see such a sign and thus promptly vote for what they are actively organizing against. If that's actually the case the democratic party has bigger issues on its hand than a single black woman carrying a flippant sign. I mean they already have bigger things to worry about.

The problems we have don't even begin with this fucking sign. This is pure exaggeration coming from you. This isn't dividing people, were already divided. According to the woman who made the sign, this is reminding the choir that hey just don't show up one day out of the year for a march actually use your privilege and talk to the people in your lives who may have voted for Trump and get them here with us. This is no different from what I see all day on Gaf from people telling other liberals that protesting isn't enough, show up to the polls and vote etc. Since we are liberals the choir we should be able to hear hard truths like that and not take our ball and run home. There's no way something like this is gonna make people vote against their own party.If it is we are beyond fucked plain and simple and there's nothing the existence of that sign will change either way.

 

[Messofanego]

Choir? But it seems like you're talking about people who have either attended the march or would be attending the march which is the fucking choir! I would imagine the women attending these marches would be the not only the ones the sign is directed to but the only ones who has the ability to take it constructively. I don't imagine the women attending these rallies to be fickle enough to see such a sign and thus promptly vote for what they are actively organizing against. If that's actually the case the democratic party has bigger issues on its hand than a single black woman carrying a flippant sign. I mean they already have bigger things to worry about.

The problems we have don't even begin with this fucking sign. This is pure exaggeration coming from you. This isn't dividing people, were already divided. According to the woman who made the sign, this is reminding the choir that hey just don't show up one day out of the year for a march actually use your privilege and talk to the people in your lives who may have voted for Trump and get them here with us. This is no different from what I see all day on Gaf from people telling other liberals that protesting isn't enough, show up to the polls and vote etc. Since we are liberals the choir we should be able to hear hard truths like that and not take our ball and run home. There's no way something like this is gonna make people vote against their own party.If it is we are beyond fucked plain and simple and there's nothing the existence of that sign will change either way.

Agreed. Let's not get thin-skinned like Trump over some criticism. There has never been a successful movement where everyone was in lock-step unless if it was totalitarian and no dissenting voices were allowed. Acknowledge differences and be inclusive.

 

[Trojita]

Didnt Hillary win Washington in an absolute landslide? Very possible that they really dont know any other women who voted for Trump.

Yes 90.9% of DC voted for Hillary. Only 4.1% voted for Trump. And that's the whole city just not women. You are going to get some transplants from North Virginia and parts of Maryland, but those are still highly liberal.

You're letting facts get in the way. Like repeating the 53% number that is likely wrong.

 

[Xisiqomelir]

250% extra for third parties is a good sign.

50 more years till the end of the DNC-RNC duopoly?

 

[The Last Wizard]

This shit is a merry go round and it's an easy fix lol

 

[RastaMentality]

Did anyone post this yet, the woman from the photo gave an interview:

http://www.theroot.com/woman-in-viral-photo-from-women-s-march-to-white-female-1791524613

fantastic interview that people need to actually read instead of whining "this is how you get trump" just because of a sign.

 

[Angelus Errare]

Tweets above are very telling. As much as people want minorities to shut up or there's another 8 years coming(as if this is their fault) there's still a lot of issues that need to be discussed and addressed.

It's always minorities fault. It's "our fault" because not enough of us came out to vote (not at all the fault of voter suppression). it's our fault because pushing for inclusion and equality pushes people towards Trump (because you know fragility needs to be coddled at the expense of our humanity), but when we speak up on the constant negative narrative that we get saddled with daily then we get a bunch of lame ass ain't shits pulling the one of two quotes by MLK (and now as of recent Obama) they know and are comfortable with.

We're tired of the shit and if us voicing our concerns and clapping back at America's bullshit is the reason for America's fall then this country needs to plummet.

 

[Friggz]

my lunatic cousin is on her way to completely brainwashing and destroying her 13 year old daughter.

 

[Dai101]

my lunatic cousin is on her way to completely brainwashing and destroying her 13 year old daughter.

And i'm sure you're calling on her bullshit.

 

[CountAntonius]

my lunatic cousin is on her way to completely brainwashing and destroying her 13 year old daughter.

Tantrumps...did she just ironically invent an awesome and very useful new term?

#TanTrumps

 

[Infinite]

my lunatic cousin is on her way to completely brainwashing and destroying her 13 year old daughter.

This is a far bigger problem than that woman and her protest sign.

 

[Friggz]

And i'm sure you're calling on her bullshit.

i dont touch politics on facebook with a 10 foot pole. especially with a 13 year old family member. it is rage inducing though.

 

[LaNaranja]

i dont touch politics on facebook with a 10 foot pole. especially with a 13 year old family member. it is rage inducing though.

You have the power and opportunity to influence and create change. To actually make a tangible, small difference. Even if you don't change the mind of that individual, maybe you get through to someone else who reads what you have to say. Your silence implies agreement in the eyes of family and friends.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

You have the power and opportunity to influence and create change. To actually make a tangible, small difference. Even if you don't change the mind of that individual, maybe you get through to someone else who reads what you have to say. Your silence implies agreement in the eyes of family and friends.

Can you really fault someone for not wanting to deal with crazy relatives on Facebook? C'mon...

 

[KO Traveling Hobo]

Okay, in this case you're looking to change people. I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about having the numbers to create change. You do that by bringing people together for one cause, not making them upset about marching with you. That's what gets these people to stay home or vote in a monster that at least makes them feel good about themselves.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Again, this is caring more about the message than amassing an army. And it's how you lose.

Last thing - even in the thing I commented on, the person holding the sign said nothing about deep intelligent discourse. There were the people who were actually going to think about the issue from the start, and the other people that straight up disagreed with her. So yeah, it's not like you're running a seminar - you're just dividing people you need to stand by you to achieve a single goal.

All the rest of this is preaching to your own choir.

The sign is only divisive if conversation begins and ends with the sign. If a dialogue is created by it, then it creates an opportunity for people to become closer than they otherwise would have.

 

[LotusHD]

Can you really fault someone for not wanting to deal with crazy relatives on Facebook? C'mon...

I mean I guess, but you'd hope someone would at least be willing to talk to their family, if they're uncomfortable discussing this at length with people they aren't related to.

 

[watershed]

The sign is great and it clearly has started many, many conversations. And there have been many long form articles posted in this thread about the various racial dynamics of the Women's March. There is plenty to read, listen, and learn from if you want to.

 

[Vermillion]

Choir? But it seems like you're talking about people who have either attended the march or would be attending the march which is the fucking choir! I would imagine the women attending these marches would be the not only the ones the sign is directed to but the only ones who has the ability to take it constructively. I don't imagine the women attending these rallies to be fickle enough to see such a sign and thus promptly vote for what they are actively organizing against. If that's actually the case the democratic party has bigger issues on its hand than a single black woman carrying a flippant sign. I mean they already have bigger things to worry about.

The problems we have don't even begin with this fucking sign. This is pure exaggeration coming from you. This isn't dividing people, were already divided. According to the woman who made the sign, this is reminding the choir that hey just don't show up one day out of the year for a march actually use your privilege and talk to the people in your lives who may have voted for Trump and get them here with us. This is no different from what I see all day on Gaf from people telling other liberals that protesting isn't enough, show up to the polls and vote etc. Since we are liberals the choir we should be able to hear hard truths like that and not take our ball and run home. There's no way something like this is gonna make people vote against their own party.If it is we are beyond fucked plain and simple and there's nothing the existence of that sign will change either way.

It is admirable that it is important to you to talk about these racial issues. And I agree it is important. This said:

1) The choir = people who already agree with you. Not everyone marching with you agrees with your sign.

2) Read what I was responding to - some people took it constructively, others did not. And that's just how it works. (Also, the woman holding the sign was white in the example I responded to)

3) How can one believe in both white fragility AND that making white people uncomfortable about their privilege while they're supporting the same cause as you = success?


I think you misunderstood some of what I was saying. The march was unified against Trump. That does not mean they agree with you about anything else. I am saying don't divide your allies in times of war.

And maybe you believe that liberals can hear hard truths, but I've become far more cynical than that.

The sign is only divisive if conversation begins and ends with the sign. If a dialogue is created by it, then it creates an opportunity for people to become closer than they otherwise would have.

I agree with this. Of course, many people that disagree may never say a word. But I agree with you.

 

[Trojita]

i dont touch politics on facebook with a 10 foot pole. especially with a 13 year old family member. it is rage inducing though.

I've told family members in their face that they were voting for a racist misogynist who lies and isn't even a good business man. And why would you even want a business man, even more one that doesn't even pay his workers?

I did my part to sway people that we're "both sides are bad" as well.

So maybe some people on GAF can take this anecdotal evidence as one person that did do this. Don't judge a person on what you think they've done.

 

[Infinite]

It is admirable that it is important to you to talk about these racial issues. And I agree it is important. This said:

1) The choir = people who already agree with you. Not everyone marching with you agrees with your sign.

2) Read what I was responding to - some people took it constructively, others did not. And that's just how it works. (Also, the woman holding the sign was white in the example I responded to)

3) How can one believe in both white fragility AND that making white people uncomfortable about their privilege while they're supporting the same cause as you = success?


I think you misunderstood some of what I was saying. The march was unified against Trump. That does not mean they agree with you about anything else. I am saying don't divide your allies in times of war.

And maybe you believe that liberals can hear hard truths, but I've become far more cynical than that.



I agree with this. Of course, many people that disagree may never say a word. But I agree with you.

The general point I'm making is there's no way in hell that that sign, whether you disagree with it or not, is going to make people who attended that march now suddenly vote republican. There's simply no fucking way. If that somehow is the case, continuing with your military metaphors, I want a new fucking army. That seems to be what you said which started this conversation between you and I. If that's not what you intended to say please pick your words better. Because at that point what are you going on about? What kind of divisions you think this sign is creating?

I have no idea what you mean with your 3rd point. You seem to think there's somehow a contradiction there. White fragility is definitely an observable phenomenom. White fragility is a by product of having white privilege. Talking about race period is enough to trigger white fragility. It doesn't matter how flippant you are or how reasoned and nuanced you are. The fact is because of cognitive dissonance (which is what white fragility kinda is but I digress) white people will be uncomfortable in these conversations and there no getting around that at all but we're not gonna move forward by not having them. At some point you just have to be straight with people and reach who you can. Also that's why it's important that white people who do get it use their privilege and have these conversations within their social sphere. If you wanna argue that being needlessly antagonistic is unhelpful then you'll get no debate from me. unfortunately we're dealing with people who are rejecting the discussion because of the topic in and of itself.