[austin-cheney]

Sigh. There is no such thing as reverse-isms.

For example discrimination based on race is racism, objectively. Creating a reverse-ism out of that subjectively singles out a particular identity to champion. An effective code of conduct would not mention such subjectivity in any form.

[charlescearl]

Racists will always find a way to make ending racism “illegal” (they write those “laws”). Love how the US Civil Rights Acts and various emancipation clauses always contain loopholes to re-enslave folk. Like using civil rights law - mostly constructed to make life for formerly enslaved Africans plausible - now being used to erase, incarcerate, unemploy, de-legitimize, kidnap, and perform deportation of the same folks it was intended to protect. It was never “color blind” because slavery was not “color blind” (the terms always re-inscribe the borders of racism and ableism don’t they?) Never trust colonizer “law” or “logic”. Rant done.

[mock-possum]

Reverse isms are just a more specific type of an ism - instead of being wielded by a privilege group against the historically marginalized, it’s the reverse.

I do agree that it’s unkind to treat those two isms differently, or to condone one while tolerating the other - but pretending that there’s not such thing as the ‘reverse’ case seems silly, when it’s so easy to define and easy to IRL.

[austin-cheney]

Yeah, I understand the intent, but it’s still a bullshit play for identity politics. I so completely hate identity politics. Objectively speaking, the reverse of racism is no racism.