Scalzi on why “but not all [p] are [q]ists” defensiveness is a derail
By Feministe on April 24, 2014
We tend to get it here mostly on threads which criticise racist aspects of mainstream feminism, but it’s all over the social justice map – people derailing criticism of ongoing perpetutations of oppressions with their defensive insistence that while yes of course that incident was very wrong however critics need to acknowledge that They/We are not all like That/Them. John Scalzi lays out the 101 on why that argument functions as just another silencing tactic whether one means it that way or not, and notes how falling back on it blocks one’s ethical self-examination of how one benefits from the status quo: The Four Levels of Discrimination (and You) (and Me, Too). But where does the line get drawn between being [x]ist and being an [x]ist, as it were? . . .
More Like This
Most Popular on BlogHer