| That's not the same thing. The big piece you are missing is context. Making an argument devoid of context means that you are ignoring how people understand something given a generalized heuristic. "Pro-black" is not equivalent to "Pro-white" mainly because of the context within the US. "Pro-black" however is equivalent to "Pro-Italian" or "Pro-Irish" because of the historical context of how those phrases relate to generalized heuristic (cultural celebration usually involving commerce). > If I (white) saw 'black friendly cafe' or something, I don't have a problem with that to be clear, but I would absolutely assume that I'm not exactly welcome, that it's intended to serve that community If your lived experience is that you haven't been welcome to a 'black friendly cafe', then that is unfortunate. That is not my experience and I can't find any data or historical context that reinforces that narrative. I'm not saying it doesn't happen or that if it did, it would not be wrong, but that statement reinforces my point. You are using the context of how you would feel as an equivalency to the intent of the person who puts out the message. If you don't allow for nuance, then you will have missed the point. "Pro-white" or "White friendly" messaging historically has been extremely overt as being anti-Black, so much so that we have entire amendments in our US Constitution that exist in an attempt to combat them. |
Do you see the issue with this mode of thinking?