Rojava Free State wrote:Stagnant Axon Terminal wrote:first of all, minorities, especially in situations where they are being threatened and targetted, deserve to have safe meeting spaces. If that means my white ass can't go to a meeting, GOOD. They deserve to not have to look at every white person and think, "are they here to be an ally or are they here to derail the conversation or heckle or even attack us?"
Second, Vester Flanagan has nothing to do with this. Period. The people who ASSOCIATED Flanagan with BLM and tried to pit all of it on BLM and accuse them of trying to start a race war is what prompted ANY response from BLM. They are WHOLLY separate.
Oh so then are you okay with white people having their own safe spaces or is this a one way street? You're opening a very dangerous can of worms when you start setting up racial safe spaces. It sounds an awful lot like segregation, and frankly I don't see how a movement is gonna get alot of white support when it tells white people to stay away. You do understand that under your logic, I could set up a, idk, safe space from Jews right? No jews allowed in Utica after sundown anymore, because as Arabs and Hispanics we deserve a "safe space."
I'm sure you're okay with being excluded as a white person, but unlike you if someone said to me "you're not allowed here because you are hispanic," I would go out of my way to deliberately mess with the bigots by grabbing every brown man in this city and heading there. Racists don't deserve a safe space, so says many a person and I'm sure you have said it one time or another, so if you need a safe space for your race, then no quarter for you in my world.
Segregation is a bad thing. I'd rather we didn't go back to it.
"No Whites" areas sounds disturbingly similar to things labelled "Coloureds Only" in the past. It baffles me that some minorities would want to open that particular door which took so much pain and work for them to close.