you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]SnowAssMan 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

That would be like saying "black privilege", or "sexism against men". It's all a way of undermining the idea that inequality exists. Context matters.

[–]TheOnyxGoddess 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

We can point out inequality without being hypocritical. Hypocrisy actually puts people off from the movement. We're meant to be fighting for rights, not kneecapping the ability for people to point out bullshit and if one day our minority groups starts demanding bullshit rights (much like what trans people are doing today), I would rather people outside our own group feel comfortable campaigining to counter it.

[–]SnowAssMan 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

But you're making it seem like if we say "white tears" we have to start saying "black tears" too, in order to "restore the balance". In its proper context however, that suggestion would be restoring the imbalance. "White tears" is already a move to restore the balance. Yes, it's "hypocritical", but that's kind of the point. It makes white people feel othered. It's a taste of their own medicine.

If instead of feeling like you're being taught a lesson (as a white person by a minority group) you instead feel the need to teach them a lesson for how they made you feel, then you're missing the point entirely, which only further justifies the making of it in the first place.

It's like with "all lives matter", only someone completely out of touch with reality would get offended by 'black live matter'.