Is the use of WASP in this case wholly inappropriate and clearly intended to be derogatory? Why is it tolerated and not considered a form of hate speech?
Personally, I did not read that as inciting violence or discrimination against my whitebread self. So I don't think it's hate speech.
I think, as Wikipedia says [1], "The term applies to a group believed to control disproportionate social, political, and financial power in the United States. It describes a group whose family wealth, education, status, and elite connections allow them a degree of privilege held by few others. [...] When the term appears in writing, it usually indicates the author's disapproval of the group's excessive power in society."
It seems like a legitimate label here. Our notion of what a "proper" name looks like comes out of that cultural tradition. And as one of our own notes, that notion is often painfully wrong. [2]
However, many other traditions are much more restrictive regarding personal names[1]. Some countries require the names to be gender specific. So blaming protestants from the British isles (and their American relations) is quite misplaced and inaccurate.
You seem to be arguing with something nobody said. There's no assertion that WASPs are the only people in the world to have ever decided that one sort of naming convention is normal.
What is being said is that our particular notion of names comes out of that WASP tradition. (Which, if you'll take 30 seconds to read Wikipedia, has important class and wealth connotations.) And therefore it doesn't apply perfectly to an extremely diverse society of immigrants, one with a long history of cultural, religious, and social experimentation.
It's an accident of history that a dominant strain in our culture is "protestants from the British isles". But it's still a pretty important accident. It leaves a mark. We still call that part of the country "New England", for example.
Forget what the article says, about some people not even being allowed to use their own names — what's really important here is that we not write anything that remotely sounds like blaming white people.
Amen. Even as a white guy I'm getting tired of Fragile Whiteness Syndrome [1]. Just pointing in the direction of the source of the standards that Facebook is enforcing and we're suddenly off to the races.
You can blame Germans and French if you like. It would be accurate, in some contexts. But blaming protestant Anglos here is factually incorrect. Would you rather they further misinformation and mischaracterize people and history just because they feel like it?
I have no idea why you keep going on about various other countries' naming laws, when the passage in question wasn't even talking about enforcement at all:
> Facebook likes to think of names as a one-to-one mapping. You have one name, and that name is how people refer to you at all times. It’s a very WASP notion of how names work, and the reality is far more complex.
Facebook, as an American company, inherited its ideas about names from mainstream American (i.e., WASP) culture. This was a poor choice, because those ideas do not also cover how some other cultures treat names. That's all this is saying. Your interpretation of this as "inflammatory" and "mischaracterizing history" is frankly baffling.
Is the founder of FB protestant, or maybe the leadership? Does vkontakte, a foreign company, in a country with no protestant culture offer less restrictive naming policies?
Characterizing the issue as one caused (and the inference is only protestant Anglo culture would cause) this kind of names requirement is disconnected from reality. Companies in non Anglo and non protestant places have similar and even more restrictive policies. And also this idea of names is not an Anglo concept, as it was characterized.
"Facebook likes to think of names as a one-to-one mapping. You have one name, and that name is how people refer to you at all times. It’s a very WASP notion of how names work, and the reality is far more complex."
Nope. Not inappropriate. Not derogatory. Not hate speech. Different cultures treat names different ways. Here, "WASP" is a reference to the dominant American culture. I didn't bat an eye when I read it.
To me, "WASP" has a pretty narrow definition, with strong East Coast and British affinities. I'm largely Irish by heritage, and so of course there's some Catholic in there too. So, while I'm white, I'm (mostly) not Anglo-Saxon or Protestant.
In fact, ironically, one of the characteristically WASPy things that comes to mind immediately is the prevalence of unusual names -- "Leslie" as a man's name; "Van" as a legit first name; people with three or four middle names; whole lines of firstborn men with the same formal name leading to ubiquitous uses of nicknames, etc.
My point is, the term WASP is used here not as an enpowerment, but as a target of blame for the subject matter. If WASP is a reference to dominant American culture, why not just say dominant American culture? White Anglo Saxon Protestants are in no way responsible for Facebook's naming schemes. Maybe it isn't offensive to you, but it is unquestionably slang, and I would add yes, offensive, because it's a) not true, b) out of context, and most significantly c) in direct contrast with the article's call for understanding of other cultural identities.
I personally don't see a big contradiction between calling for a more diverse understanding while pointing out that what is nominally "normal" is part of a very specific dominant cultural segment.
And given that the term originated among sociologists, some of them WASPs themselves, I think calling it "unquestionably slang" is strong. Ditto "offensive". If you're offended, you can just say, "I'm offended" without trying to cast it as some sort of false objectivity.
It's certainly used to be inflammatory and simultaneously denigrate the people it's supposed to represent. It's, sadly, wrong. Anglo protestants are not the ones who brought about the concept of one to one name mapping, nor the most vigorous about insisting upon proscribed names.
One can go over to nominally catholic and gaellic France and find much more state control over accepted personal names[1] A name new to France has to be proven to exist, if its not an indigenous name in France. The are other countries with similar control over names some of which require names to be gender specific and unambiguous, in that respect.
White Anglo-Saxon Protestants are not the inventors of names nor does it seem like that group in particular is radically defensive of how naming works.
I'm not sure it is hate speech, but it was meant to cast negativity on one group.
I think, as Wikipedia says [1], "The term applies to a group believed to control disproportionate social, political, and financial power in the United States. It describes a group whose family wealth, education, status, and elite connections allow them a degree of privilege held by few others. [...] When the term appears in writing, it usually indicates the author's disapproval of the group's excessive power in society."
It seems like a legitimate label here. Our notion of what a "proper" name looks like comes out of that cultural tradition. And as one of our own notes, that notion is often painfully wrong. [2]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Anglo-Saxon_Protestant
[2] http://www.kalzumeus.com/2010/06/17/falsehoods-programmers-b...