• absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    2 days ago

    I was making the point, that despite the fact that this is mildly ok. The test for anything that gives one group power over another, is to switch the groups.

    If it’s still reasonable, than it is probably OK to keep it. If however it seems wrong after the switch, the bar to keep the power imbalance should be very high.

    • floofloof@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      That’s a very superficial test that deliberately omits the social and historical context that makes sense of these categories. You can’t just insert one party for another in statements about a relationship where one side has more power and privilege than the other, and look at your feelings about the result to evaluate the statements. White people have historically mistreated everyone else and robbed them of freedom and power. Men have historically abused women. To say “let’s swap the words and see how we feel then” is not a reasonable way of evaluating statements about the relationships between these groups.

      What this article says about the importance of entrenched power structures in racism also holds true about the relations between men and women:

      https://www.aclrc.com/issues/anti-racism/cared/the-basics-level-1/myth-of-reverse-racism/

      • absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 day ago

        You can, and do.

        It helps set the bar, it is a tool for determining how to assess what level of imbalance is reasonable.

        It’s not the only tool, nor an I arguing for it to be.