Originally posted by Bardock42If this class was a "black only", for example, space you might be correct.
Because there is a different context. White people do not needs safe spaces, because they do not get discriminated against for their race. So them desiring a white only space has different connotations than black people desiring a black only space.The question whether they should be allowed to have a white only space is unrelated. But people would be outraged if it was white's only because it is in essence saying "I don't like black people I don't want to do yoga with them" while the opposite does not necessarily say that but could be "I don't want to deal with discrimination while I do yoga, so I want to do it with people of my race".
It specifically forbids only white people from attending. Every other race, which could also discriminate against them, are allowed.
Originally posted by NemeBro
If this class was a "black only", for example, space you might be correct.It specifically forbids only white people from attending. Every other race, which could also discriminate against them, are allowed.
I know some pretty white Cubans, for instance, and I have a friend who's half Lebanese but looks white AF.
Originally posted by long pig
Didn't they branch off from the algo/sax/celt people?
Let me walk you through the history of Britain. First there came the Brythonic Celts. Then, there was a brief period of Roman occupation where some Italian/various European blood got mixed in. Then the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes, Germanic peoples from present day North Germany and Denmark, invaded. And finally there's the Normans, Scandinavian by descent, who invaded in 1066.
Originally posted by Omega Vision
No lol.Let me walk you through the history of Britain. First there came the Brythonic Celts. Then, there was a brief period of Roman occupation where some Italian/various European blood got mixed in. Then the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes, Germanic peoples from present day North Germany and Denmark, invaded. And finally there's the Normans, Scandinavian by descent, who invaded in 1066.
Just no swarthy people.
Originally posted by NemeBro
If this class was a "black only", for example, space you might be correct.It specifically forbids only white people from attending. Every other race, which could also discriminate against them, are allowed.
Nah, it still applies the same. Safe spaces can be for multiple races. White people do not experience racism, so they are often uninformed and/or unintentionally act in a way that is hurtful, it is understandable why someone would want a safe space from that, and the reasons why a KKK meeting is whites only are completely different. Even if it was blacks only there could still be someone who is anti-black (self hating or internalised or whatever), it's about decreasing the chance, not eliminating it completely, cause that's impossible.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Nah, it still applies the same. Safe spaces can be for multiple races. White people do not experience racism, so they are often uninformed and/or unintentionally act in a way that is hurtful, it is understandable why someone would want a safe space from that, and the reasons why a KKK meeting is whites only are completely different. Even if it was blacks only there could still be someone who is anti-black (self hating or internalised or whatever), it's about decreasing the chance, not eliminating it completely, cause that's impossible.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Nah, it still applies the same. Safe spaces can be for multiple races. White people do not experience racism, so they are often uninformed and/or unintentionally act in a way that is hurtful, it is understandable why someone would want a safe space from that, and the reasons why a KKK meeting is whites only are completely different. Even if it was blacks only there could still be someone who is anti-black (self hating or internalised or whatever), it's about decreasing the chance, not eliminating it completely, cause that's impossible.
an anti-white yoga class has all the impact and threat of a popcorn fart when weighed against 1000+ white supremacist groups. fair enough.
but you can't negate the definition of 'racism' because one is severe and widespread, while the other is ineffectual. it's a 'no true scotsman' fallacy. give it up, bruh.
Originally posted by Bashar Teg
an anti-white yoga class has all the impact and threat of a popcorn fart when weighed against 1000+ white supremacist groups. fair enough.but you can't negate the definition of 'racism' because one is severe and widespread, while the other is ineffectual. it's a 'no true scotsman' fallacy. give it up, bruh.
It doesn't fit every definition of racism. It faces one common one that's equivalent to "discrimination based on race", but it misses the point to not specify why the acts are different.
Originally posted by Bardock42
It doesn't fit every definition of racism. It faces one common one that's equivalent to "discrimination based on race", but it misses the point to not specify why the acts are different.
yes i agree, and have agreed, but you are severely overstepping with the 'no true racism' bit.
Originally posted by Bashar Teg
yes i agree, and have agreed, but you are severely overstepping with the 'no true racism' bit.
I have, from the start, specified that it fits a common definition of racism. It doesn't fit the definition of racism that I generally use however. Since we are dealing with two different definitions of the word "racism" we have to specify which we mean, particularly because the trend in this thread has been to pretend that the "racism" of this yoga group is the same as the racism of white groups (say for example a whites-only country club...)