{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
originally posted in:Sapphire
3/8/2013 4:03:15 PM
9
I wonder if I should at all read into the fact that it comes about a week after Black History Month. I guess as long as we're going to have these silly things that reinforce the very inequality they seek to rectify, we may as well put them together on the calendar.
English
-
It ain't reinforcing inequality yo
-
But it is, though. If we truly care about these issues, we should be thinking about them every day as part of the world's problems, not just one day as exclusively women's (or any other group) problems. Are women's problems just women's problems? I think they are [i]our [/i]problems.
-
Edited by Seggi: 3/8/2013 4:27:31 PMBlack history month is more about forcing people to focus on black history for a select period of time than designating that period as the only time when black history is permissible. Similarly, international women's day might bring particular issues to matters of women's rights on this day, but that doesn't mean we should ignore them on any other date.
-
Edited by RighteousTyrant: 3/8/2013 4:36:06 PM[quote]Black history month is more about forcing people to focus on black history for a select period of time[/quote]Which reinforces the idea that the black experience (and by extension black people) are and should continue to be kept separate from the whole. That's the problem. Plus, by declaring that we're going to "focus" on it for one month (the shortest one, mind you), that seems to imply that we don't recognize it at all in the other months, or at least not as much as we should, and that we're also going to do nothing to change that. That, too, is problematic.
-
Edited by Seggi: 3/8/2013 4:42:17 PMI think there's an awful lot of equivocation going on in that assertion. Edit: Focusing on it in one month doesn't imply that it should be ignored in other months. That's strictly a personal interpretation, and it's one that should be avoided largely because it's kind of nonsensical.
-
[quote]Edit: Focusing on it in one month doesn't imply that it should be ignored in other months. That's strictly a personal interpretation, and it's one that should be avoided largely because it's kind of nonsensical.[/quote]That is nonsensical, good thing that's not what I'm saying. I'm not saying it implies that it [i]should be[/i] ignored; I am saying that it implies that it [i]is[/i] ignored (why else would the month be necessary?).
-
Of course it's largely ignored - that's entirely true. If black history weren't marginalised, there would be no point to the month. What's your point? I mean, that certainly doesn't make the idea racist.
-
Edited by RighteousTyrant: 3/8/2013 4:56:18 PMMy point is, why do we consider it an acceptable solution to pigeonhole black history into a single month, as opposed to solving the actual problem that BH is not given much attention the other months of the year? (My guess: because that is much easier.) Which, for example, from a school-oriented perspective, would include working to make sure that events representing black history are no longer ignored or glossed over, but instead appropriately highlighted throughout the school year as they come up in the regular course of study.
-
I'm not sure of the particular circumstances of black history month (we don't have that particular occasion here in Australia, though it might be a remedy to the total lack of an education we're given with regard to the history of indigenous Australians), but I would say the generalised "women's day" practices applies much more strongly.
