I wasn't asking you for proof, AM, but for an explanation of why those stats might be that way.
Your reply, essentially, is that there is no oppression. I think that's a purblind position. I had thought you were a more thoughtful person, but hey, I've been wrong before. You can apparently claim there's no oppression without supporting that claim, even as you brush away the mountains and mountains of evidence for oppression because a law got passed fifty years ago.
It's a facile and conveniently vapid point on your part which no doubt helps you sleep well.
Me, I think you speak from the luxury of whiteness when you say stupid shit like "there is no oppression". It marks you as a simple thinker who doesn't question his own precepts.
Your reply, essentially, is that there is no oppression. I think that's a purblind position. I had thought you were a more thoughtful person, but hey, I've been wrong before. You can apparently claim there's no oppression without supporting that claim, even as you brush away the mountains and mountains of evidence for oppression because a law got passed fifty years ago.
It's a facile and conveniently vapid point on your part which no doubt helps you sleep well.
Me, I think you speak from the luxury of whiteness when you say stupid shit like "there is no oppression". It marks you as a simple thinker who doesn't question his own precepts.
