any male under 30 is essentially disqualified from discussing the race?
You wouldn't be being...discriminatory or anything, would you?
No but a male under 30 is not the ideal messenger to discuss sexism.
No, but a white person is not the ideal messanger to discuss racism.
I find both of those sentiments to be equally offensive. Actually, yours is even more offensive because it discriminates by age as well as gender.
Ideas are sensible in one's estimation or not. One finds them agreeable or not based on reasoning that takes place after hearing or reading them, at least that's how it should be. The messenger, to me, doesn't make them valid or invalidate them.
If this diary were an apology, I could see considering the source as sincerity is integral to the value of an apology. But, that is not what this is. It is a collection of ideas or arguments put forward that anyone can think about and embrace or reject in part or on the whole. To do otherwise is to invite incorrect analysis and it is also to presume that, regardless of the merits of the ideas themselves, an entire group of people is not capable of a valueable or viable intillectual concept. That's a pretty crummy thing to do to women. Likewise, it is crummy to do to anyone not old enough or female enough for your liking.
And your writing style - are you in academia?
I am not saying a 24-year-old male must be censored. I was a fan of thereisnospoon before this primary, I will be a fan of spoon after this primary. I believe he's a future champion of progressive causes. Spoon's knowledge political history and philosophy is on par with that of John Adams in his day (well, when John Adams was a young man at least.)
I know spoon, in his heart, wants equal opportunity for everyone regardless of gender, age, or race.
I also know that unconscious bias is something that I've caught in myself, against my own kind. It's something AAs hold against AAs. Women against women. Latinos against latinos.
I know a large part of Hillary-hate has nothing to do with sexism. But I have seen, to my own surprise, this primary season, that a large, very large part of Hillary-hate is caused by sexism. And what's shocked me is a lot of it comes from women "she voted for IWR because she's female and she was trying to look tough." I don't believe Hillary would do such a thing. I believe she voted for the war, as did her fellow New York Senator, for deterrence.
"If she wouldn't campaign like a man people wouldn't hate her so much" said a progressive, latina friend of mine who works in ethnic media.
could be misread.
Let me explain: I thought I was laying it on too thick, so I said the philosophical knowledge of spoon and hekebelos was an par with John Adams when he was their age.
This is not to belittle your young age. Adams was pretty effing smart before he was 25.
Oh, tell hell with it. Just TR me.
no TR necessary, the statement is logical. And my dislike of Hillary Clinton has everything to do with Democratic Party structures. I don't have nearly as much of a problem with Hillary Clinton, to be honest, as I have with the cast of characters she surrounds herself with--Carville, McCauliffe, and the like, who basically want to run the party like it's 1992.
I thought you and spoon were well-educated in philosophy, etc.
