Boston mayor excludes White people from holiday party

Jump to Last Post 1-7 of 7 discussions (103 posts)
  1. Readmikenow profile image95
    Readmikenowposted 4 months ago

    Could this be considered institutional racism? The mayor isn't upset at this racism, she is upset the white elected members found out about it.

    "Boston's Democratic mayor has apologized for causing offense with a holiday party invitation that excluded White people.

    Michelle Wu drew criticism Wednesday after her aide sent a holiday party invite to all members of the Boston City Council for an "Electeds of Color Holiday Party," even though seven of the officials are White.

    Wu told reporters on Wednesday that the invite was not meant to be sent to White council members, who had their invitations rescinded about 15 minutes after the original email was sent.

    Wu's aide Denise DosSantos, who sent out the invite, tried to smooth things over in a follow-up email prior to the party.

    "I wanted to apologize for my previous email regarding a Holiday Party for tomorrow," DosSantos wrote to city council members. "I did send that to everyone by accident, and I apologize if my email may have offended or came across as so. Sorry for any confusion this may have caused."

    https://www.foxnews.com/media/boston-ma … iday-party

    1. Castlepaloma profile image76
      Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      That wouldn't work at the white house holiday bash.

    2. Sharlee01 profile image78
      Sharlee01posted 4 months agoin reply to this

      Deleted

      1. Castlepaloma profile image76
        Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        They is a saying,  that only white people can be racist.  It's more and more becoming a myth, as all lives matter. 

        Let everyone get together on the holidays, forget political indifference.  I bite my tongue, even about Trump or Biden.

    3. Sharlee01 profile image78
      Sharlee01posted 4 months agoin reply to this

      I refrain from commenting on her political affiliation. However, I feel compelled to criticize her for displaying blatant discrimination and a clear bias against individuals of Caucasian descent.  She has exhibited a form of discrimination that contradicts the progress "we the people" have aimed to achieve in our society. Her choice to discriminate reflects a divisive mindset that emphasizes differences to serve her own biased agenda.

      In my view,  in America, we pride ourselves on being a melting pot, embracing diverse backgrounds, including religions, nationalities, and traditions. Her attitude fosters negativity and fuels animosity. Consider the hypothetical scenario of a white-only event where no individuals of African descent are allowed—such an exclusionary stance is contrary to the values we have endeavored to change over the past century. It appears that some individuals have not grasped the message of inclusivity.

      Oh well, social media will offer her racist ideologies, and it will be available as long as we have the wonderful internet. The internet can be a real bitch, can it not?

      1. Readmikenow profile image95
        Readmikenowposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        I'm just shocked that she didn't see where she was doing anything wrong.  Boston is where Harvard is located.  This is a VERY liberal city.  It is a blatant display of the hypocrisy of the left. They rage at anyone they consider to be racist, but they turn a blind eye toward their own racism.

        1. Credence2 profile image78
          Credence2posted 4 months agoin reply to this

          I decided the check out the facts, to make sure that a conservative viewpoint does not omit the "rest of the story".

          I believe that this event was needlessly devisive and not prudent as the mayor represents all Bostonians.

          Yes, it is a liberal city, most large cities are liberal because the people inhabiting them are generally better educated, ethnically diverse and accepting, unlike Mayberry.

          1. Sharlee01 profile image78
            Sharlee01posted 4 months agoin reply to this

            Really?  Excepting discrimination against another due to skin color... LOL

          2. Readmikenow profile image95
            Readmikenowposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            Does this explain the intense government corruption, high crime rates, gang activity as well as vast amounts of homelessness and worse...unlike Mayberry?

            1. Credence2 profile image78
              Credence2posted 4 months agoin reply to this

              Do you really think that the difference between Laramie, Wyoming and Los Angeles is only because the residents of a city virtually hundreds of times larger, is liberal? Really?

              1. Readmikenow profile image95
                Readmikenowposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                I think it is a proven fact that liberal policies such as "defund the police," being a "Sanctuary City," and others have led to the destruction of cities such as Los Angeles, Chicago, NYC and others as a good place to live.

                I have lived in Los Angeles, New York City and now live in a small town. I would NEVER go back to living in a city.

                1. Credence2 profile image78
                  Credence2posted 4 months agoin reply to this

                  Of course, big cities offer employment and opportunities. People there are  either already are or will become more open minded, because of the simply diversity of people and ideas therein. There is a need to promote acceptance and cooperation in order to survive, while the rightwinger is impaled on the pitchfork of "American Gothic".  My worse large city that I inhabited was Los Angeles, I revel in its cultural variety, but the cost of living and crime that is associated with any large city, forces me to scale back. But, would be hard pressed to find any large city that is conservative or under Republicans. "Diversity" is an expletive for conservatives and I understand why. But that is the real world and I suggest that they adapt or.... How do you defund police in Mayberry, put Barney Fife out of job?

              2. wilderness profile image93
                wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                There are two commonalities between cities of high crime, homelessness, government corruption, etc.  One is size and the other is liberalism. 

                Hard (very hard), to think that liberalism is not contributing - that it is solely due to size.

                1. Credence2 profile image78
                  Credence2posted 4 months agoin reply to this

                  You think Homo sapiens cease being Homo,sapiens when they reside in cities. There are virtually no Large cities that are conservative. If there enough people that congregate in any one place  anywhere, people in the interests of harmony are going to lean left, they have to.

                  If Boise became a megalopolis you would find its politics changing. YES, it is due solely to size otherwise , there would be more Republican led large cities. It is not a difficult conclusion to come to if you really think about it.

                  1. wilderness profile image93
                    wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                    "If there enough people that congregate in any one place  anywhere, people in the interests of harmony are going to lean left, they have to."

                    Why?  Why does living in a large city mean one has to be left, with all the nonsense the left wingers produce?  Not saying it doesn't happen (it certainly does), but why is it a necessity?

        2. Sharlee01 profile image78
          Sharlee01posted 4 months agoin reply to this

          I can only share my view on this one --- I have long noted that a traite that sticks out in some liberals can point the finger in general and cry racism, but are blind to the real meaning of what that word means. I call it  - bad is bad when I say it is syndrome.

          I mean at this point we have many liberals across the world claiming the genocide of Jews is right.

    4. abwilliams profile image67
      abwilliamsposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      All part of the double standard, do as the left dictates, not as they do!!

      1. Sharlee01 profile image78
        Sharlee01posted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Yes, this was very clear. "Do what I say not what I do".

        1. Readmikenow profile image95
          Readmikenowposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          What puts on a display of what the left is about more...the liberals trying to justify the Boston Mayor's racism or the presidents of the Universities of Penn., Harvard and MIT trying to justify the antisemitism at their universities?

          It's a tough decision to make.

          1. Sharlee01 profile image78
            Sharlee01posted 4 months agoin reply to this

            I got you... The Mayor's attitude, her agenda are very clear to me. Might as well be written across her forehead.

          2. Willowarbor profile image60
            Willowarborposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            Oh the universities..

            Should we punish speech, restrict it, or do we punish action?

            I thought there were a lot of free speech absolutists on this forum

            1. wilderness profile image93
              wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              IMO (and my opinion alone)  Free speech includes anti-Semitism...until it is coming from a government figure representing a government institution.  When the speech is considered official policy it is intolerable.

              Any racist action, of course, is not acceptable regardless of who it comes from or in what capacity.  From a 3 year old toddling down the sidewalk to the President of the US to the 100 old bedridden lady (that understands what she is saying) it is unacceptable.

              1. Willowarbor profile image60
                Willowarborposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                Stefanik’s questioning grabbed the spotlight. But there’s no evidence anyone since 7 October, or even in recent history, has called for the genocide of Jews on any American campus, public or private. Stefanik’s question implies that such calls are commonplace, but she offered no proof.

                Her question was sort of a trap. The question can’t be answered with just “yes” or “no”. Public universities, as state actors, are bound by the first amendment, as are private universities which receive federal funding. And the vast majority of private universities guarantee freedom of speech and academic freedom as part of their core mission.

                So, if someone had called for the genocide of Jews, which they haven’t, that would be extremely disturbing but still protected speech.

                The speech alone does not constitute harassment. In fact, the utterance should be an opportunity to debate and debunk  and not silence  the worst ideas of our day.

                Seems like some just want to curb free speech on campuses they consider elite or liberal while preserving it in other areas like X, which is a literal hellscape of hate.

                Stefanik would have us believe that that we should be more worried about non-existent calls for genocide on American college campuses than with what many experts are warning is an actual genocide in Gaza, funded and supported by US bombs and political cover.

                1. wilderness profile image93
                  wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                  Yes, colleges most often have free speech as a bastion of their core philosophy...a bastion that is quickly disappearing even as lip service is made.  One has only to look at the percentages of liberal speakers vs conservative ones welcomed to the campus to see it.

                  But that is even more reason to demand that the college itself does not participate in any form of racism, whether it be a call for genocide or simply using admissions as a method to discriminate against one or more "tribes".

                  So I hold to my opinion; the officials of any university, or any other government entity, do not have unlimited free speech when representing the US government.  They must present the official philosophy of the country, which is that all are equal and no racism is evident from the government.

                  1. Sharlee01 profile image78
                    Sharlee01posted 4 months agoin reply to this

                    I am pleased to see liberal donors pull back funds.  Free speech is for all, and liberal universities have not been giving Conservatives the right to free speech for a very long time...  Money talks...

                  2. Willowarbor profile image60
                    Willowarborposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                    So I hold to my opinion; the officials of any university, or any other government entity, do not have unlimited free speech when representing the US government.  They must present the official philosophy of the country, which is that all are equal and no racism is evident from the government.

                    This had nothing to do with the speech of University officials or racism?

                    Although, the SCOTUS has long held that the First Amendment’s freedom of speech tenets fully apply to public universities.  Like all members of a university community, faculty, as private citizens, enjoy the same First Amendment rights to speak as any private citizen. 

                    The Congressional hearing with the university presidents was centered around limiting the speech of students.

                    Are you saying you would like limitations of speech, placed on faculty and students?

            2. Readmikenow profile image95
              Readmikenowposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              Free Speech is guaranteed under the Constitution.  The government cannot censor speech.

              I the civilian world, you have free speech but are not immune from the consequences of your speech.  KKK has rightly been given a bad time for exercising their free speech. That is reality.

  2. Willowarbor profile image60
    Willowarborposted 4 months ago

    Sort of seems the point is being missed here and the media as usual  has turned to this into something seeming more nefarious.  Something to create outrage.

    Wu said the holiday party was an annual tradition intended to celebrate diversity.  "I’ve been a part of a group that gathers, representing elected officials of color across all different levels of government in Massachusetts,” Wu said, according to WCVB. “A group that has been in place for more than a decade, and the opportunity to create a space for people to celebrate and rotate who hosts".

    It was one of many parties scheduled, not the only.  It's also interesting that the party has been held for more than a decade without issue.

    I see it as an "affinity " group gathering.   Don't we have many examples of events that focus on the commonality of its members? 

    Groups of people  with similar backgrounds, interests, or demographic factors such as gender or ethnicity?  Affinity groups can take many forms, such as women's leadership groups,  Mom's groups, Dads groups, health related groups, religious groups, LGBTQ and those that gather people of specific ethnicity or race.  We can all think of many examples.

    They build connections based on shared characteristics or interests. 

    Why can't people gather based on a shared reality?  The fact that ONE of the parties, was to include people with the commonality of elected people of color. I fail to see how that is racist. Because you are celebrating a commonality among people you are somehow racist?

    One  random example: 

    "The Latina/o/x Faculty Affinity Group seeks to empower Latina/o/x faculty at Emory University School of Medicine."

    Racist? Exclusionary?

    1. wilderness profile image93
      wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      Well, let's see.  A "colored" mayor, hosting a holiday party at a city owned site, denying access to any Caucasians.  There cannot be a more blatant, in-your-face example of racism possible.

      We all know exactly what the response would be to a white mayor denying access to all colored council members at a government party (all attendees thus have a "commonality), but this one is all right because the people invited all have dark skin.  I can't imagine a more ridiculous stance, or one more harmful to the fight against racism.

      Boston needs a new mayor, and soon.

      1. Credence2 profile image78
        Credence2posted 4 months agoin reply to this

        It was a mistake in my opinion to make such a distinction to the point of disinviting anyone to this party. There is no reason why diversity could not be celebrated and attended by anyone who wishes to come. These are touchy issues and the ramifications of such a course has proven disastrous. That shared reality could easily be shared support, open to all that want a part.

        1. Willowarbor profile image60
          Willowarborposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          As I read it, certain members were not disinvited. They were mistakenly invited to an event celebrating elected people of color.  It was one of many parties on the docket.
          Why should such an event be disallowed? Or viewed as racist?

          Should my employer bar me from organizing a little party of Lithuanian colleagues? Prevent me from forming a group based on sharing  our common heritage,  history and culture?   Should I further be prevented from forming and heading a group hypothetically called "Lithuanian women for literacy"?   Or maybe even a more specific hypothetical gathering , "Black LGBTQ women in recovery". 

          Why should I not be allowed to commiserate with those I have something specific in common with to share stories, connect with? Gain support from? 
          Doesn't mean I'm not still a part of the rest of society. 


          I'd appreciate your take/insights on my previous post

          1. Credence2 profile image78
            Credence2posted 4 months agoin reply to this

            "I'd appreciate your take/insights on my previous post"

            Thanks, Willow .....

          2. wilderness profile image93
            wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            Was there a party scheduled for Caucasians?

            No?  Why not?

            1. Sharlee01 profile image78
              Sharlee01posted 4 months agoin reply to this

              Could you imagine if there was, that is more the question?

        2. wilderness profile image93
          wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          The mistake was in the original idea of a racially divided party put on by government officials, for government officials...of a specific color.  The very idea/concept of celebrating "'diversity" while denying attendance to half the population because they are the wrong color is beyond stupid.

          1. abwilliams profile image67
            abwilliamsposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            Right?
            MLK's words are as dismissed, as our inherent rights are!

        3. Sharlee01 profile image78
          Sharlee01posted 4 months agoin reply to this

          The ramifications of her racism are what send us backward.  Do we not need to all be on one page to work forward? To address discrimination in any form?  This form of hypocrisy needs to be pointed out loud and clear. That is how we diminish racism. We call it as we see it.

          1. Credence2 profile image78
            Credence2posted 4 months agoin reply to this

            I did say what she did was wrong and inappropriate considering her position and the office that she holds. I don't make any excuses for her. I just hope that when the issues are found on the rightwing corner of the ledger we would all be equally enthusiastic toward pointing it out "loud and clear".

      2. Sharlee01 profile image78
        Sharlee01posted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Common sense tells us, and actually in this case should tell us all -- this was an act of discrimination.  Yes, Boston needs a new Mayor.

        1. abwilliams profile image67
          abwilliamsposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          "Yes, Boston needs a new Mayor."

          And for all of the racist Leftists tearing people, communities, cities and states apart, to be replaced as well.....while at it!

    2. Readmikenow profile image95
      Readmikenowposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      "Why can't people gather based on a shared reality?"

      What do you think of a city mayor holding a White, Christian, heterosexual, male, Christmas party?

      1. Castlepaloma profile image76
        Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Boston's Democratic mayor has apologized for causing offense with a holiday party invitation that excluded White people.

        As long as it's an recognized mistake, which doesn't happen much in politic, he can possibly be saved.  Since it's a government,  all under the constitution. It was a serious mistake and can be a good reason to get rid of him.

      2. Willowarbor profile image60
        Willowarborposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        What do you think of a city mayor holding a White, Christian, heterosexual, male, Christmas party?

        The party has been a tradition for the past 10 years.  Celebrating elected people of color, in which she is such a person.  It was about recognizing diversity. Nothing wrong with holding such an event. Because you want to acknowledge diversity does not make you racist.

        1. Readmikenow profile image95
          Readmikenowposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          Interesting how diversity excludes people because of their race.  Makes you wonder how the left defines the concept of diversity and inclusion.

          1. Sharlee01 profile image78
            Sharlee01posted 4 months agoin reply to this

            What I have derived, and this is my view, they define it in any way necessary to suit any given need they have to cover for discrimination. The definition is bendable to suit their agenda. I see this kind of mindset as non-productive.

            1. Readmikenow profile image95
              Readmikenowposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              Excellent point!

        2. wilderness profile image93
          wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          There has been a Boston tradition for 10 years of government throwing a party for government employees, but only employees "of color"?

          If so, Boston really, really needs an overhaul of its government, for there is absolutely something very, very wrong of holding a racially divided party in a government facility using government resources.

          No, acknowledging diversity does not make you a racist.  Celebrating that diversity, but blocking the "wrong" race from attending your party does make you a racist; it is an almost textbook definition of racism.

        3. Readmikenow profile image95
          Readmikenowposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          "Because you want to acknowledge diversity does not make you racist."

          No, excluding people at an event because of their race is racist.  Those who support such a thing are racist.  If you want diversity and exclude people because of their race, that is not diversity, that is racism.

          This is all very simple.  The Boston mayor is a racist.  If they've had holiday parties that have excluded people because of their race for a decade, then they have held racist events for a decade.

          Those who support such a thing are supporting racism.

          It is no more complicated than that.

      3. wilderness profile image93
        wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        And, I might add, doing it on city property using city resources.  Resources being paid for by some of those denied access.

      4. Sharlee01 profile image78
        Sharlee01posted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Good point --   We need to address discrimination in any form.  This form of hypocrisy needs to be pointed out loud and clear. That is how we diminish racism. We call it as we see it.

    3. Credence2 profile image78
      Credence2posted 4 months agoin reply to this

      Willow, here is my take..

      We want to talk in terms of inclusion rather than exclusion. The mayor has to look at the big picture as to how such an exclusion will be received by the community of Boston at large.

      Race and race related matters are hot topics today and I don't want to give the rightwinger any ammunition as for every offense from the Left, the other 99 comes from their side. Of course, I am not going to hear about any of those.

      Race unlike many other gatherings of commonality is much more sensitive. Although this particular gathering has been going on for some time, it might not be a good idea. Celebrate, include not exclude.

      The only thing that we as representatives of the city have in common is serving the people of Boston. The mayor as the leader, needs to set the example and make that clear. Such a gathering should not be instigated from her position. It is ill advised.

      There may be more than a few white folks willing to help Empower the Latina faculty at the Emory University School of Medicine. For a lot of these initiatives, we need all the hands on deck that we can get.

      1. Willowarbor profile image60
        Willowarborposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        I appreciate your response.  I can certainly see your perspective and there is much validity there. 
        I suppose my ongoing issue with our more far right folk is what I perceive to be a lack of nuance yet again. 

        We're talking about one party in a string of Christmas parties to be held. Much different than saying hey we're having one Christmas party this year and only folks of color are invited. That would be exclusionary and racist.

        Events for underrepresented groups, including women and ethnic or religious minorities, have really  been a longstanding occurrence in political and cultural institutions and workplaces across the country.  We all know that people gather in this way all the time.

        For me, it feels less about excluding people and more about spaces for like-minded individuals to connect and support each other.  It's in our nature to be drawn to those with a common background or history. 

        As always, the far right seems to generally see the binary choices. We can all have our "special interest groups" and still belong to the group at large without it being racist in any manner.

        Question to all..Should she have canceled the tradition?
        Would that have come across as potentially racial to the others?

        If I am throwing a party to celebrate my hypothetical Lithuanian heritage  I'm doing it to join with those who share my culture, my language, my food... I'm not throwing it for the purpose of  excluding  others.

        1. Credence2 profile image78
          Credence2posted 4 months agoin reply to this

          Because as rarely as conservatives are right about anything, it is true that the concept of diversity includes us all, everyone contributes to the mosaic. If it were me in her place, I would have avoided a situation of division and not allow the other side any oxygen at all.

          No, the tradition is fine, just don't limit invitations to only people of color, it sends a contrary message.

          For the Lithuanian heritage party you are having, I say bravo, but you are not the mayor, whose actions, pro or con will be closely evaluated, criticized or commended.

          She is no longer just a member of a "tribe" but the mayor of Boston expected to preside over the many tribes that make up the city both equally and fairly. She needs to be aware that she is being held to different standard than just one of the boys.

    4. Sharlee01 profile image78
      Sharlee01posted 4 months agoin reply to this

      "Wu said the holiday party was an annual tradition intended to celebrate diversity.  "

      Are Caucasians not part of humankind's diverse makeup?

      I have not been able to fact-check if the party was held yearly.

      I do feel this all comes at a time when the racial divide in America repeatedly makes headlines frequently. Over the summer, more than 45 percent of Americans said racism is a big problem or the biggest problem facing the United States. Only about 14 percent of Americans said racism is not a problem.

      "Why can't people gather based on a shared reality? "  Like the KKK? She clearly showed a bias at best. Can't imagine if that invite was a Whites-only event...

      1. Willowarbor profile image60
        Willowarborposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        The event has happened for decades. And of course the KKK can assemble.  This thread has devolved into a lot of false equivalencies.

        I think the question remains what was wrong with having a party for the celebration of elected officials of color? Because that is simply what we are talking about here.

        Should she have asked the tradition? What would the fallout have been? I suppose the only other option is to have the annual party but invite all but with the focus remaining on the purpose of the gathering.

        I think that some of the media is spinning this to be that she set out to have a no-whites party as if that was the sole purpose and theme of it.

        1. Sharlee01 profile image78
          Sharlee01posted 4 months agoin reply to this

          I think this thread is interesting, and truely has sort of given us all a peak into given idelogies. Could I have lip-synced a few of the comments -- yeah. As I am sure my words could have also been lip-synced.

          "I think the question remains what was wrong with having a party for the celebration of elected officials of color?"

          I think we may want to also ask why all that chose to have been included to celebrate elected officials of color.   Do you feel any elected official gets their job without many diverse individuals voting for them? 

          This was a party for city employees and her invitation discriminated. This was not a house party, she is the Mayor of a city, and she represents the people of that city, all the people. I can't in any respect understand where you are coming from.  Sorry... I do as always respect your diligence to defend your thoughts.

          1. Willowarbor profile image60
            Willowarborposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            This was a party for city employees and her invitation discriminated.

            It was one of several parties and it was specifically for council people.  It was not the only one. Had it been the only one, yes that would be alarming. But it was one of many.


            The mayor..
            “I look forward to celebrating with everyone at the holiday parties we will have besides this one, as well.”

            Should she have gotten rid of the tradition of this party? I wonder what kind of backlash she would have felt.

            I agree, it's a very interesting thread and as always is eye opening to the different thought processes.

      2. Castlepaloma profile image76
        Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        A white share reality might be.

        Tucker County, West Virginia (100% white/non-Latino)
        Robertson County, Kentucky (100% white/non-Latino)
        Hooker County, Nebraska (100%)

        Except every human being on earth has at least 2.1 black gene in them.
        So much for KKK.

        1. wilderness profile image93
          wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          As every human being on earth came from Africa, I would have to say that every one is 100% black genes, however modified those genes might be.

          1. Castlepaloma profile image76
            Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            Today, all humans are classified as belonging to the species Homo sapiens. However, this is not the first species of homininae: the first species of genus Homo, Homo habilis, evolved in East Africa at least 2 million years ago, and members of this species populated different parts of Africa in a relatively short time. Can imagine if we mix sex with all the colors of the skins of the world,  we get brown.

            1. wilderness profile image93
              wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              "Can imagine if we mix sex with all the colors of the skins of the world,  we get brown."

              Overall true, but we are all familiar with cases of white born to brown and vice versa.  Genetics is a funny thing and is not a simple mixing bowl we envision.

  3. Willowarbor profile image60
    Willowarborposted 4 months ago

    Affinity groups are typically formed around shared interests, experiences, or identities, and can be found in a variety of settings, from workplaces to universities to religious organizations. They provide a space for members to discuss their shared experiences, and to support each other in times of need.

    In general, these groups are often about gender, sexual orientation, disability, race, national region, and veteran status.  I bet many of them even have Christmas parties every year lol

    Is the right wing looking to ban or get rid of these types of groups?

  4. Willowarbor profile image60
    Willowarborposted 4 months ago

    “Electeds of Color” party is a longstanding tradition and just one of multiple holiday celebrations the city throws.

    “There are many, many events that are private events for all different sorts of groups, and so we’ve clarified that and look forward to seeing everyone at one of the other dozens of opportunities to celebrate the holidays together,” Wu said in video from NBC 10.

    Councilor Ruthzee Louijeune, in a separate NBC10 interview...

    “It’s not at all divisive,” Louijeune told the station. “It’s creating spaces for people and communities and identities with shared experiences to come together.”

    So dozens of other parties... Maybe even some, God forbid celebrate some other type of diversity..

    But, the question is why is certain media pinning this all on her, as if it were her idea? But at the end of the day why can't you have a dozen parties that are different in focus?

    https://www.bostonglobe.com/2023/12/14/ … one-viral/

    1. wilderness profile image93
      wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      "But at the end of the day why can't you have a dozen parties that are different in focus?"

      Because racism, in all its ugly forms, has been and continues to be a bane and a problem in our country.  Giving racist parties does nothing to help end the practice; it can only exacerbate it and make it worse.

      1. Castlepaloma profile image76
        Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Kind of how I feel about race theory in schools.

  5. Ken Burgess profile image76
    Ken Burgessposted 4 months ago

    In a somewhat related report...

    FBI will reportedly adopt ‘LGBTQIA+ acronym’ at behest of one of their ‘nine Diversity Advisory Committees’

    https://www.bizpacreview.com/2023/12/16 … s-1420483/

    “LGBTQIA+ stands for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer/Questioning, Intersex, Asexual/Aromantic, plus,” the FBI explains. “The ‘+’ represents other gender, sexual, and romantic identities not covered by the letters of the acronym.”

    “Nine is a lot of committees!” noted Elon Musk.

    But the FBI insists the updated acronym is no laughing matter.

    “More than 30 federal agencies, including the Department of Justice, use a form of the expanded acronym,” it told employees. “Effective immediately, the FBI will use LGBTQIA+ for all internal events, observances, and communications; all U.S. Intelligence Community products; and all external communications (social media posts, public reports, public announcements, etc.).”

    ---

    Come on... I mean, COME ON, admit it... if not to me, then at least yourself, you have NO IDEA who these people are that are running your country, the FBI, CIA, DOJ what they believe, what they intend, and where they are taking us.

    Admit it... you are more clueless about who these people are and what they represent than Biden is.

    1. Credence2 profile image78
      Credence2posted 4 months agoin reply to this

      Oh really, perhaps they bring a little bias of their own into their reporting, Ken.

      "BizPac Review is a top-rated political news website that provides breaking news and analysis unfiltered by the liberal bias that has eroded the media’s credibility. With public trust in the press sputtering at an all-time low, BizPac Review fills the void with its unparalleled coverage of current events that the mainstream media intentionally ignore."


      Why am I going to give this rag any credibility?

      1. wilderness profile image93
        wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Because it is unfiltered by liberal bias?   lol

        1. Credence2 profile image78
          Credence2posted 4 months agoin reply to this

          Leaving right wing bias intact?

          1. Castlepaloma profile image76
            Castlepalomaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            Funny how humans have always conflicts on what is truly left or right, politics. Or what's up and down of religion and simple math of finance. Trees don't fight with their own branches.

  6. Readmikenow profile image95
    Readmikenowposted 4 months ago

    Could this be considered racist?

    "Super Bowl champ 'sick of average white guys commenting on football,' proposes racial bowl game

    It wasn’t exactly clear who Mendenhall was directing his ire at but his post on X came a few hours after he commented on the criticism of the Pittsburgh Steelers and head coach Mike Tomlin.

    "I’m sick of average white guys commenting on football," he wrote. "Y’all not even good at football. Can we please replace the Pro Bowl with an All-Black vs. All-White bowl so these cats can stop trying to teach me who’s good at football. I’m better than ur (sic) goat."

    https://www.foxnews.com/sports/super-bo … -bowl-game

  7. Readmikenow profile image95
    Readmikenowposted 4 months ago

    Is THIS racist?

    "Wisconsin university sued for allegedly demoting staff member from diversity position for being 'White'

    A University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire staff member sued her employer over being ousted from a position in a campus diversity office allegedly for being "White."

    The lawsuit alleges that when Rochelle Hoffman was promoted to UW-Eau Claire's interim director of the campus's Multicultural Student Services office, the school's former Vice Chancellor for Equity, Diversity and Inclusion and Student Affairs Olga Diaz was told by students that a White woman was not fit to preside over a position intended to serve students of color.

    Hoffman said she felt compelled to resign last year after eight months of intense hostility and staff questioning her "legitimacy" after being promoted to interim director of the campus's Multicultural Student Services office, the complaint states.

    Hoffman worked for the campus's Blugold Beginnings office for six years prior to the promotion. According to Wisconsin Public Radio, the "office served underrepresented, low-income and first-generation college students."

    "Despite Hoffman’s exceptional qualifications, however, students, faculty and staff opposed her appointment to Interim Director of MSS solely because she was white," the complaint claims. "It was exclusively Hoffman’s identity as white that was the issue; criticism was about her race and color, not her qualifications."

    https://www.foxnews.com/media/wisconsin … eing-white

    1. Willowarbor profile image60
      Willowarborposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      Investigators with the Universities of Wisconsin said Hoffman's claim of being demoted from her interim position was unfounded.

      Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R) earlier this year blocked Legislature-approved pay raises for UW employees. This month he and UW President Jay Rothman reached a deal that would release those raises in exchange for UW freezing diversity position hires for several years and restructuring some existing positions.  Looks like she was simply "restructured" out of her job by Republicans lol.

      This isn't Hoffman's first complaint alleging racial discrimination at UW-Eau Claire. In November 2022, she filed a complaint with the State of Wisconsin Equal Rights Division within the Department of Workforce Development after third-party investigators with the UW System disagreed with her claims.

      Investigators said Hoffman's claim of being demoted from her interim position was unfounded.

      Leave it to Fox too only give half of the story.   

      I have a suggestion for the Fox faithful,  the New York Post readers, the Newsmax followers... Always look for the rest of the story.

      https://www.wpr.org/federal-lawsuit-uw- … tion-white

      1. Readmikenow profile image95
        Readmikenowposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Let us look a little closer at this.

        "Investigators with the Universities of Wisconsin"

        Now, what other conclusion would "Investigators with the University of Wisconsin" find?

        You don't really believe those investigators working for the University are unbiased...do you?

        This is just fodder for the media.  It is of no real significance.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)