This makes sense. “South Korean journalist” is a very clear way of saying “western journalist” also I’m sure “anti white racist” isn’t any sort of culture war word salad.
What politics are those?
For the record, and despite the handle, I’m not “white”. A “quadroon”, if you must!… Furthermore, I’m politically neutral - abstaining from voting, fully. I’m not American, either…
In any case, the rest of palefaces's comment plainly criticizes Sarah Jeong for doing the thing quoted: "since her sexuality was outed by a Western journalist" by sarcastically suggesting that Sarah Jeong should feel satisfied. Sarcasm is problematic, particularly in text, but I think in this case the sarcasm is clear. paleface's comment provides details which substantiate the claims, they aren't refuting it.
Incidentally, I think your comment employs sarcasm too. But just to be safe, "This makes sense" is you being sarcastic, right? You think this actually doesn't make sense?
> I’m sure “anti white racist” isn’t any sort of culture war word salad.
I am virtually certain that claim refers to this [quoted from wikipedia]:
> "In August 2018, Jeong was hired by The New York Times to join its editorial board as lead writer on technology.[18][19] The hiring sparked a strongly negative reaction in conservative media, which highlighted derogatory tweets about white people that Jeong had posted mostly in 2013 and 2014.[20][21][22] Critics characterized her tweets as being racist; Jeong released an apology,[23][24] saying that the tweets were meant to satirize online harassment toward her as a woman of color.[20][25]"
Whether or not you find the satire excuse credible, this incident is plainly the basis for the accusation of Sarah Jeong being racist. It may not be a perspective you agree with, I haven't bothered to look up the tweets and their context so I don't have an opinion one way or the other concerning Sarah Jeong actually being a racist or merely satirizing racism. But regardless of whether you agree with the claim it's not 'word salad' e.g. the incoherent speech of a schizophrenic. She would not have said her statements were satire of racism unless her statements could be reasonably construed as resembling racism. Satire of a thing will inherently resemble the thing, so teasing out the difference will be an exercise in subjective judgement. Tacitly accusing somebody of mental illness because you disagree with their subjective interpretation of ostensible satire is inappropriate.
This makes sense. Being born in a place irrevocably bestows a person with a nationality that supersedes citizenship, where they were raised and educated, or where they’ve lived nearly all of their lives. In this essay I will explain the good faith purpose of bringing up someone’s birthplace in this context, and I will begin with this thought: If California is west, isn’t Korea even more west? Furthermore I
I don't understand other peoples' denial of the intent with GP's comment. GP specifically quoted the sentence that ended with "Western journalist" and followed that with "South Korean journalist", as an implied correction, when that journalist's South Korean birthplace could hardly be any consideration into her journalism, when she's been living quite the western life since she was 3 years old.
Self-identity can absolutely be relevant, especially if there is a history of anti-white racism.
edit: also see "It's not far off from Korean culture" https://twitter.com/sarahjeong/status/981575986322989056 which apparently she is qualified to judge.