_PM_ME_YOUR_FORESKIN

_PM_ME_YOUR_FORESKIN t1_j4p36j8 wrote

100%.

I feel like mentioning “poverty” without mentioning 300 years of forced illiteracy, not being able to own land, having your children sold away from you, indentured servitude after enslavement, reconstruction, lynching, segregated schools, property tax based school funding, redlining, racist loan decisions, or any one of the myriad poverty inducing structures built against Black folks since 1619 fails to state it well enough. You don’t have to cite every point but “poverty” stated as if it’s in a vacuum irks me. And racism will continue as long as we keep it obscured instead of stating it explicitly.

22

_PM_ME_YOUR_FORESKIN t1_j4p2rh5 wrote

Oh. Trust and believe I’m aware. I am just trying to get this thread’s OP to go one step further and point to a single structure that perpetuates inequality for Black people — instead of stating “living in poverty” as if it exists in a vacuum.

9

_PM_ME_YOUR_FORESKIN t1_j4ozcj4 wrote

This assumes that social disparities can’t be studied empirically, which is not true. Divorcing science from the social contexts it finds itself is rarely wise. And your comment seems to be exactly why science that speaks to structural inequality is so needed. The average person already downplays racism and believes it’s just people complaining about nothing. We don’t need people with flimsy scientific literacy to then use it as a “racism can’t exist because how do you prove it scientifically” argument to uphold their own racist views.

27

_PM_ME_YOUR_FORESKIN t1_j29pa3o wrote

I’m not sure what the sentiment in Brazil is — and I’m not familiar with the current president’s controversial past — but these headlines are so much more reassuring than the ones born during Bolsonaro’s presidency. I hope it’s as positive of a change for you as Biden has been for us. Perfect? No. But civility in politics and a decisive step away from extremism is always a great thing, right?

201