One thing I think you left out: How can it POSSIBLY benefit POC students to tell them the education system has entrenched/systemic white supremacy built into it? What would be the point of applying themselves academically if they've been convinced the system is literally designed to guarantee they fail?
"No point studying for the SAT young POCs; the whole point of that test is to make sure people with your skin tone can never get a high score. You might as well just drop out and start selling drugs".
*Sigh* time to break out the ol’ blood calculator…
Absolutely brilliant writeup mate. Couldn’t agree more. Do you find that a similar type of ideology emerges along the axis of gender and sexuality when this rational is applied to that realm of identity metaphysics?
I believe in the day the people are convinced to give up the ghost on race and gender.
Such is any process of being. A specter that eternally haunts us, lest we accept it for what it is: the reality that we choose to make of ourselves in the world, and nothing more.
I find that many misunderstand the process of identity formation, believing it to be an abstract manifestation of the mind that in turn defines us, as opposed to the process of being in the world and how we choose to define ourselves through our actions in the world.
I would distinguish gender as a sex differences vs gender as internalized consumer preferences. The latter, the trans shit, the pronouns shit, etc… is probably the next thing I’m going to write about.
I think the differences between men and women have meaningful implications that we can’t ignore, something that is doubly true in a rapidly changing world. Neither male domination (the historic model) nor identitarian antagonism (the feminist model) are the way to resolve the social tensions that arise from this. This is something I haven’t given enough thought about yet
Based. The conclusion I’ve come around to on the matter is that the construction of an ideology based on gender functions the same way as race ideology.
Being a sex-dimorphic species, sex-based biological differentiation has inherent material and physical meaning, and as a consequence, naturally gives rise to notions of femininity and masculinity (which gets extended to how biology physically impacts our mind and emotions). This necessarily means that it is also possible to embody any such desired expression of these physical characteristics, regardless of said sex-based biology, as long as it remains within the context of our own individual sex-based biology (in other words, notions of trans-physical expression can only have meaning if they are inherently based on a sex-binary such as ours, rendering notions of non-binarism incomprehensible and merely physical expressions of androgenized secondary-sex characteristics).
However, notions of gender arise from abstractions of these physical characteristics (and their mental/emotional extensions) to form mythologized stereotypes of “masculine and feminine gender characteristics” (read as: mystical ideological constructs analogous to race), similar to how notions of race arise from abstractions of other physical characteristics to form mythologized stereotypes of “inherited racial characteristics” (such that you argue against above).
Gender becomes as much an ideological tool as any other identitarian ideology when it demands people adhere to a mystical morality of what determines “worth-through-identity” as a cope for being a backwards and regressive form of identity construction.
Way I see it, you could apply your basic form of analysis presented here, instead targeting gender mythology.
One thing I think you left out: How can it POSSIBLY benefit POC students to tell them the education system has entrenched/systemic white supremacy built into it? What would be the point of applying themselves academically if they've been convinced the system is literally designed to guarantee they fail?
"No point studying for the SAT young POCs; the whole point of that test is to make sure people with your skin tone can never get a high score. You might as well just drop out and start selling drugs".
I was purposefully focusing only on the political aspects of race ideology and excluding anything individual or psychological.
Amazing essay. I shared it and was almost immediately yelled at.
That just warms my heart :)
*Sigh* time to break out the ol’ blood calculator…
Absolutely brilliant writeup mate. Couldn’t agree more. Do you find that a similar type of ideology emerges along the axis of gender and sexuality when this rational is applied to that realm of identity metaphysics?
I believe in the day the people are convinced to give up the ghost on race and gender.
Also I really like the term “ghost” it rings very true as a description of identity
Such is any process of being. A specter that eternally haunts us, lest we accept it for what it is: the reality that we choose to make of ourselves in the world, and nothing more.
I find that many misunderstand the process of identity formation, believing it to be an abstract manifestation of the mind that in turn defines us, as opposed to the process of being in the world and how we choose to define ourselves through our actions in the world.
I would distinguish gender as a sex differences vs gender as internalized consumer preferences. The latter, the trans shit, the pronouns shit, etc… is probably the next thing I’m going to write about.
I think the differences between men and women have meaningful implications that we can’t ignore, something that is doubly true in a rapidly changing world. Neither male domination (the historic model) nor identitarian antagonism (the feminist model) are the way to resolve the social tensions that arise from this. This is something I haven’t given enough thought about yet
Based. The conclusion I’ve come around to on the matter is that the construction of an ideology based on gender functions the same way as race ideology.
Being a sex-dimorphic species, sex-based biological differentiation has inherent material and physical meaning, and as a consequence, naturally gives rise to notions of femininity and masculinity (which gets extended to how biology physically impacts our mind and emotions). This necessarily means that it is also possible to embody any such desired expression of these physical characteristics, regardless of said sex-based biology, as long as it remains within the context of our own individual sex-based biology (in other words, notions of trans-physical expression can only have meaning if they are inherently based on a sex-binary such as ours, rendering notions of non-binarism incomprehensible and merely physical expressions of androgenized secondary-sex characteristics).
However, notions of gender arise from abstractions of these physical characteristics (and their mental/emotional extensions) to form mythologized stereotypes of “masculine and feminine gender characteristics” (read as: mystical ideological constructs analogous to race), similar to how notions of race arise from abstractions of other physical characteristics to form mythologized stereotypes of “inherited racial characteristics” (such that you argue against above).
Gender becomes as much an ideological tool as any other identitarian ideology when it demands people adhere to a mystical morality of what determines “worth-through-identity” as a cope for being a backwards and regressive form of identity construction.
Way I see it, you could apply your basic form of analysis presented here, instead targeting gender mythology.
Thank you Jay