The “white people” idea has some merit when you consider that whiteness has usually been an arbitrary group of races and cultures that define the dominant group in that society. The whole “Italians and Irish weren’t once considered white” thing.
Obviously individuals can experience hardship and you might even argue that preferring non-white candidates or affirmative action is harmful (I’m not going to, but you can).
My position on this is that everything is a patch on fundamental inequality and I’d rather just get to anarcho-communism so we don’t have to solve 100 individual problems caused by historical racism and the capitalist machinery that lets that manifest as unjust distribution of wealth.
Regardless of age and gender and familial success in past generations we should all be equal.
(I’m not gonna argue that either)
yarr@feddit.nl 4 hours ago
A big problem here is that not everyone has a common definition for racism and sexism. Some definitions take existing power structures and historical context, and others don’t. A discussion about this topic should be started with what specifically each participant believes these terms mean. Otherwise you have two people talking about “sexism” but they are just talking past each other because they lack a shared understanding of the term as it is used.
TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 40 minutes ago
they are well-defined terms.
where people argue about it is who can be racist/sexist. a lot of people think it can’t exist against white men or form minority group to minority group. most of the people thinking this way are clueless white people trying to score virtue points. in those people’s minds being sexist against men is a positive thing.
truth is sexism/racism is rampant everywhere. and in some societies its far worse than it is in the USA/Europe.
SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 2 hours ago
Usually, only bigots want to redefine the definitions of racism and sexism.
It’s pretty easy not to be a bigot if you aren’t an asshole.