It is extremely easy to offend this woman. Just look at her twitter posts https[0], she plays every card in the book in this occasion she plays the racism card while arguing that she can't be a racist herself[1].
[0] https://twitter.com/adriarichards/status/313946261055221760
In this context, saying that something/someone is sexist or racist says nothing about intention, only the effect of the behavior or social structure. Further, if a behavior does not align with an existing power imbalance in society, it would not be considered x-ism; a black woman who discriminates against white men is not expressing and reinforcing an existing type of oppression, so that behavior would not be considered racist or sexist. (Remember, it's not about intentions, and it doesn't mean that the behavior is ok.)
If you think this sounds weird, please do still try to take some time to understand why this terminology arose.
That i can understand, Its racism. no argument there. So your changing the context of the word so the intent does not matter but the effect does? that's outrageous. Racism is all about the outcome AND intent.
why do all these mental gymnastics just so you can say X cannot be racist towards Y? Why even say something like that? I can't see if having any positive outcome. Its a blanket statement that while maybe true in some situations with your special definition of the word is not true in others. You can find areas of the world where almost any given race has the power/upper hand and are "racist" towards them.
My point is you cannot simply say X cannot be racist towards Y because it can, has and will happen and all levels. Sure you can limit your definition of the word racist and redefine it but really whats the point?
Either at an individual level, a social group level (X friends won't be friends with Ys) or a social/society level anyone race CAN be racist towards another. They may not be in a given situation/area/whatever crazy limitations you wanna make, but there is nothing inherently special about any race making them immune from being racist, we are all human regardless of race and we have to work together to stamp it out and statements such as hers do not exactly help at all. I'm not sure what point she was trying to make, or even you honestly, but it would be better to phrase it in a way that does not use the term racist and redefine it so people can say such inflammatory things. Notice how pretty much no one gets it, most disagree with it and it flames hate? That's not a way to fix racism.
Agreed, but individual's acts of racism don't exist in a vacuum. The aggregate effect those racist actions and attitudes creates systemic power imbalances. This wiki has starting material about the institutional and systemic effects of racism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_racism.
> why do all these mental gymnastics just so you can say X cannot be racist towards Y? Why even say something like that? I can't see if having any positive outcome.
You have to remember that for someone who is black, the institutional racism in the US effects them daily and that such institutional racism is orchestrated by the white patriarchy that is US society. For such a person, what does it mean when a white person tries to call them racist while ignoring the racism that said white person benefits from every day? Often I will see a white or white passing person call a person of color racist when the situation they are talking about is actually caused by the systemic racism that they benefit from.
> You can find areas of the world where almost any given race has the power/upper hand and are "racist" towards them.
That is true, but that doesn't really have anything to do with the context of this discussion. Racism in different societies are not interchangeable in most discussions of racism.
> My point is you cannot simply say X cannot be racist towards Y because it can, has and will happen and all levels
This is not true. Black people will never be able to exercise systemic racism against white people in US society. Black people will never be able to create an environment where white people are imprisoned more than any other group by proportion, denied access to jobs, denied access to self determination, target white people with racist law enforcement, have over-representation in government, etc.
> Either at an individual level, a social group level (X friends won't be friends with Ys) or a social/society level anyone race CAN be racist towards another.
Racism at a society level different compared to individual acts of racism. Net social aggregate effects are what racism at a society level look like. Black folks in the US are incarcerated and killed disproportionately in the US, they as a group simply cannot apply that same socially and institutionally backed violence to white people.
If the actions are racist, it doesn't matter what caused them, they are racist. To say otherwise invites a double standard.
> This is not true. Black people will never be able to exercise systemic racism against white people in US society.
Yes it is true. your assuming racist == systemic/institutional. That is not the commonly held or actual definition. It is true that overall in the US Black people will never be able to exercise systemic racism. But that's not all racism is, nor is the US the only place on the planet. And systemic/institutional can range from a company to a state to a country.
> Racism at a society level different compared to individual acts of racism.
Yes, but its not the only form of racism, your trying to redefine a word and i can't see what good it does. Prefix it with systemic/institutional, limit its scope and then maybe you can make such statements (as you did your entire post) but alone by its self you just can't.