Boston mayor excludes White people from holiday party
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reporters on Wednesday that the invite was not meant to be sent to White council members, who had their invitations rescinded about 15 minutes after the original email was sent.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-partyThat wouldn't work at the white house holiday bash.
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.
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?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.
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.Really? Excepting discrimination against another due to skin color... LOL
Does this explain the intense government corruption, high crime rates, gang activity as well as vast amounts of homelessness and worse...unlike Mayberry?
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?
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.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?
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.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."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?"Why? Why does living in a large city mean one has to be left, with all the nonsense the left-wingers produce?"
Bombshell question... Better yet, why do leftwingers vote in those that offer them nothing? Insult their intelligence, and do not do what they ask of their constituents. Gosh, should common sense take this many decades to kick in?A fair question.
People come to large cities from across the country and around the world. They bring their varied cultural diversity and ideas with them. Differing and diverse backgrounds require that be people be tolerant and accepting of different views, attitudes and customs that they themselves might not embrace.
Conservatives are well known to have an insular foundation, one inconsistent with an ever changing world. So, being "left" in a large city is by definition what it takes to live in the culturally diverse environment found in a large city and not in small towns. Tolerance and acceptance allows for coexistence of many diverse sorts of people. You won't find that in a small town.
.You are confusing tolerance and acceptance of others with a desire for massive change. Some of the most accepting people are those in small communities.
On the other hand, large cities would indeed seem to change radically, and do so every little while. Whether that is a function of size or "leftism" is another question, though.
It is quite possible that large size means large groups of people demanding that others change to accommodate them. This would make some sense, particularly when the left jumps on the bandwagon simply because discrimination is perceived but without regard for the results of the change demanded.That is wrong, is not the abortion issue the biggest desire for massive change instigated by conservatives?
While the small communities have accepting people, more are in large cities. There are NO large cities that are run by conservatives, what explains that? that would be true for any large city that is part of the world of western democracies.
Large cities are large cities and only from the standpoint of rural people are they subject to "radical change".
As I said before, if your Boise got large enough, you would see the phenomenon that you are concerned about is the result just a factor of size and growth. And from what I have understood about the growth in the region, it may be sooner rather than later. The same sorts of pressures are found in Denver, Phoenix, Nashville as relatively liberal bastions in otherwise conservative states.
In large cities everybody has to learn to be accommodating so as to continue to coexist. It ain't like "back home". Because of diversity, unjustified distinctions made among people are unjustified and not welcome.
Look what happened in Ohio over the citizens abortion ballot. The cities voted for abortion rights while the conservatives counties did not. The conservatives are free to restrict abortion among themselves, yet are told that their values do not apply to the populous urban centers in the state. Why should they? The majority has spoken."There are NO large cities that are run by conservatives, what explains that?"
That's kind of the question under discussion, isn't it? Perhaps living like ants in an anthill degrades the brain.
Yes, we're already seeing liberalism in the area. Taxes have skyrocketed, for instance, and at least one of the half dozen cities/towns are building homes for the homeless.
"The conservatives are free to restrict abortion among themselves, yet are told that their values do not apply to the populous urban centers in the state. Why should they? The majority has spoken."
As always from the left you leave out the part where conservatives vote to restrict murder while liberals demand they be allowed to murder infants at will. Get together with them and decide just what a "person" is, then decide what can be aborted and what cannot.
"People have not the time to chase after the viability of a zygote, Wilderness.
In Ohio,They did get together and the people decided in the majority to allow abortion rights, are the desires of a small group in the hinterlands to hold sway over far greater numbers? You conservatives need to get over the idea that your few is to have more weight than our many. It ain't gonna happen.
So get ready for the changes in your precious Boise, because this is just the beginning. Time to pack up and move just that much farther out? You have lived in Idaho for sometime, do you really think that the residents have changed so much While the city is actually "growing up"? How many "anthills" do you think that you can continue to avoid? Consider remote Alaska or the Antarctic, where there are no anthills because there are no ants.....There are plenty of places to escape to, plenty of flyover states and plenty of other nations where you can escape from the insanity gripping America.
Best thing to do is just turn off MSM and live out in the country... If you aren't under 50 there is no point worrying about it, enjoy the days you have left and let the insane continue to run the asylum.Yes, I can vouch for that, having physically travelled through 46 of 48 states, CONUS, the country remains wide open and vast. Canada, even more so. If I remain in disguise and inconspicuous, I could survive in even the most red corner of any red state.
In terms of identifying what is going on, in government and global affairs, it is best to define it as constructive or deconstructive.
Are we constructing a healthy, safe, society or are we deconstructing one?
Are we constructing a fair, reliable, respectful foreign relations or are we enacting violence and enforcing our views and opinions against the will and wants of others for purely corrupt reasons?
Constructive actions and relations can be seen as good. The opposite then could be seen as destructive.
The people who have brought great harm to this country, for decades, still sit in control of it today... some are constantly in the background, like Victoria Newland who once helped Dick Cheney mastermind our efforts in Iraq, and currently does similar for Biden and Ukraine.
The entire US Government is comprised of people who have helped make matters worse for Americans, or American allies, and instead of being held accountable for their misdeeds... they get promoted for it.
They never admit to wrongdoing, ever, its the cover up of one lie after another, our entire government is built on a house of lies.
Sadly, the reward for telling the truth is your destruction.
Whether you are Julian Assange a non-citizen exposing a form of government lies and wrongdoing, or you are Riley Gaines a college student trying to stand up for your rights, you will pay the price for telling truth and standing for facts and reality.
They are making it law that you have to accept their lies and feelings as reality. This is why they push their LGBTQAI+ rules and regulations in the FBI, DOJ and military, this is a necessity, to replace all people who would stand on moral, ethical, or just plain factual reality with people who will follow the ideology without question, without hesitation.
When they have completed cleaning out the halls of the Pentagon, the FBI, DOJ they will turn toward the rest of America... and now you will have your Fascism that you were so worried about.
This is why the DEI and ESG has been so prominently pushed by the most powerful corporations and financial institutions, while being co-opted into the federal government, the Oligarchy will soon have its Great Reset.
Soon you will own nothing, have no privacy, and be happy about it.
The alternative is a nice "re-education camp" for you.
My husband and I fell in love with Mexico over 35 years ago. We enjoy just peacefully blending in and enjoying their culture. We find the people friendly, we have some ideologies in common such as religion, tradition, and family values.
We respect that we are guests in the country, and make every effort to fit in. For many years people in general were not happy with their presidents. They are pleased with Obrador. Obrador is center and leans a bit left. Will we ever cut ties with America? Probably not, our children and grandchildren are here.
So, I agree, one can take America or take refuge all or part-time in another country. It's a big world.
"Yes, we're already seeing liberalism in the area. Taxes have skyrocketed, for instance, and at least one of the half dozen cities/towns are building homes for the homeless."
Why assume this is caused by liberalism, it is simply supply and demand?From what I has read, rents have been going up in the area due to increased demand over supply. Perhaps like in other large cities, the fact is that people may be priced out of the market and find themselves homeless. Who is raising taxes in "conservative Idaho" and why?
Sound like that concept conservatives love to talk about, the virtues of capitalism and the free market.I have never understood why more people mean more money is necessary (taxes) per capita. Just that it happens, and every time it does we see increasing liberalism.
For sure my area of the country is moving left...and the more left it gets the harder it is to live here for any but the rich."Just that it happens, and every time it does we see increasing liberalism."
No, an increase in population and corresponding demand for services.So no increase in the liberal end of politics and philosophy as population grows? You know better.
I don't deny that, you haven't justified an association for an increase in rents or taxes, homelessness with being liberal beyond the fact that you just say it is the cause. More people means more consideration, more problems, it ain't Mayberry no more.
Who would of thought that a formally red city like Boise would be going through these growing pains? It has become a popular destination for many across the country, from places diverse, wide and far, many of those people are liberal. Doesn't the red already there serve to counteract that? Is conservative control and influence always so weak in such a red bastion?
Yes, I can recognize when conservatives want to blame progressive folks who are generally not set in provincial ways for everything wrong under the sun. Try to screen out liberals? It is as good as using a chain link fence to keep out the mosquitos.Uh oh, you left the door open . . . I bet you get some stern looks for comparing liberals to mosquitos. Nobody likes mosquitos.
GAA very apt comparison?
Blood suckers... disease spreaders... parasites?
Ewwww... glad I didn't make that analogy, there would probably be a slew of people trying to have me banned.
Credence is more willing to risk it I guess.Nah, he just slipped and gave a peek 'inside'. ;-o
GALet's not get carried away, the only true pestilence is found solely with the Right.... and that is far worse than mosquitoes.
You know... come to think of it, that we can go from a society where a Mayor has a 'Whites Only' party to one with a 'No Whites Allowed' Party in just 60 years is damned impressive.
Who would have thought it could be accomplished in one lifetime?
I bet within another 60 years Whites won't even think such a thing as unusual, they will be accustomed to the many 'No Whites' events and places that are becoming normalized even now. They will accept their minority role in society and act accordingly, or else.There, now is the basic outcome of the Great Replacement Theory in proper sentences.
Whatever they want to call it.
What is already a reality in California will be a reality throughout the entire nation, there was never any doubt.
The whole, Identity politics, Equity, No Whites Allowed thing wasn't nearly as predictable, but is absolutely hilarious to be watching as it plays out.
Lucky for us this is only the beginning, the old... we've come a long way, but we have a long way to go is definitely at play here.Considering the nation's history of the crimes of discrimation and exclusion against those who the Rightwingers are saying now are trying to replace them, the instances in California or Boston are relative hangnails for which they prescribe chemotherapy.
This takes us back to a time when a significant number of Americans held discriminatory views. It raises questions about innate human nature—do we inherently resist embracing a diverse and inclusive society? Maybe we are showing signs of longing for groups we feel comfortable in as individuals.
" It raises questions about innate human nature—do we inherently resist embracing a diverse and inclusive society?"
One answer to that question is the psychological factor known as the 'sense of belonging'.
From Is having a sense of belonging important? by the Mayo Clinic Health System (Dec 8, 2021) comes the following quote:
"We cannot separate the importance of a sense of belonging from our physical and mental health. The social ties that accompany a sense of belonging are a protective factor helping manage stress and other behavioral issues. When we feel we have support and are not alone, we are more resilient, often coping more effectively with difficult times in our lives. Coping well with hardships decreases the physical and mental effects of these situations."
https://www.mayoclinichealthsystem.org/ … -important
And, from, The “Crisis of Belonging” at the Root of Our Political and Social Divides by Graduate School of Stanford Business (Nov 22, 2022) comes another quote:
"Cohen, a Stanford professor of psychology and of education and a professor (by courtesy) of organizational behavior at Stanford Graduate School of Business, argues that behind much of the sound and fury today is a “crisis of belonging.” Few groups are sure of their place in American society anymore, and feeling excluded makes people bitter, susceptible to misinformation, and prone to lashing out — fueling a vicious cycle."
https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/c … al-divides
There are plenty of articles about the sense of belonging. out there. I think what Cohen said rings true. The sense of belonging is a crisis today, especially in political circles, definitely cultural, race stands out, and others too.
I confess I fall into the trappings of it at times, falling into my old guy ways. I seek to identify with likeness. Simply put, it is comforting.I think we can draw conclusions as to what is going to happen from a great many other civilizations that became extremely successful and then became victims of their own success and enlightenment, the complete decadence we are seeing today and the concentration of wealth at the top.
This is the human story, we believe technology is going to make it different this time, but it is not... humans are stuck in this cycle, as sure as we are stuck in the cycle of life, we cannot escape our deaths anymore than a civilization can escape its decline.
Understanding what we are seeing today is not progress... not enlightenment, but a deconstruction and decline... a civilization is like a life form, it cannot merely exist, it is either growing and expanding or it is shrinking and decaying... the signs of a life nearing its end is evident in people, in trees, in all advanced lifeforms... the same is true for civilizations.
Technology is merely speeding up the process... Rome collapsed inwards from its peak expansion over hundreds of years... America will collapse inwards practically overnight in comparison... look how quickly the USSR collapsed and converted into former/smaller states almost overnight.
We will relinquish our military bases in Korea, Germany, Japan, etc. soon enough, the bill is coming due... these endless-wars have a price yet to be paid by America the nation and Americans, the many trillions of dollars pumped out for our efforts in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Ukraine, are coming due.
But I didn't blame size for liberalism; just noted that there is a correlation between size, liberalism and the problems big cities face, which is much greater, per capita, than small areas.
You are the one denying a causal effect, but without giving any other reason for the problems. Your claim is that size alone brings crime, homelessness, high taxes, etc. - something I question.Show me a truly large city among the top 30 in America that are not afflicted by the things we are talking about? Nothing is absolute, small cities can have some the highest crime rates in the country, particularly in smaller towns found in Southern "red" states.
The other reasons are minuscule in the face to the dominant one, almost without exception in the Western World larger cities have higher crime rates and higher costs of living than smaller towns in the same region. The predominant explanation is size and with size comes complexity. So to say that Laramie, Wyoming has less crime than Los Angeles because LA is liberal is a false premise.
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.
All part of the double standard, do as the left dictates, not as they do!!
Yes, this was very clear. "Do what I say not what I do".
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.I got you... The Mayor's attitude, her agenda are very clear to me. Might as well be written across her forehead.
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 forumIMO (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.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.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.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...
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?"Like all members of a university community, faculty, as private citizens, enjoy the same First Amendment rights to speak as any private citizen.
Perhaps I misunderstood; I thought the conversation was as a university VIP, not a private citizen. A VIP speaking for the university, not for herself. Not a casual conversation while walking down the sidewalk, but a formal affair as President of the University.
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.
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?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.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.
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"I'd appreciate your take/insights on my previous post"
Thanks, Willow .....Was there a party scheduled for Caucasians?
No? Why not?
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.
Right?
MLK's words are as dismissed, as our inherent rights are!
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.
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".
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.
"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!
"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?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.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.Interesting how diversity excludes people because of their race. Makes you wonder how the left defines the concept of diversity and inclusion.
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.
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."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.
And, I might add, doing it on city property using city resources. Resources being paid for by some of those denied access.
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.
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.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.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.
"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...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.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.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.
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.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.
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.
"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.
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?“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/"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.Kind of how I feel about race theory in schools.
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.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?Because it is unfiltered by liberal bias?
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.
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-gameIs 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-whiteInvestigators 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-whiteLet 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.
Related Discussions
- 14
‘Reverse Racism’ - Is there such a thing?
by Anish Patel 12 years ago
‘Reverse Racism’ - Is there such a thing?If you are White, have you ever felt discriminated against by a person of another race or a person belonging to a ‘minority’ group.
- 631
Why is it okay to be racist?
by Onusonus 5 years ago
I hate racism, I hate racist people, I think the Civil War was over slavery. I've seen this country embrace the self evident truth that all men are created equal, and the doctrine of Martin Luther King, until now.People get fired from their jobs and shunned from society (rightfully so) for spouting...
- 871
Racism, Institutional or Otherwise, in America
by Scott Belford 4 days ago
Three white men were recently convicted of chasing down and murdering a black man who had the audacity to appear in their neighborhood. A year ago or more they might have gotten away with it.Today there is a report of another white father and son team shooting at a black FedEx driver at least...
- 60
Why Do So Many White People Believe All Racism Is In The Past?
by VC L Veasey 9 years ago
Why Do So Many White People Believe All Racism Is In The Past?
- 31
Ar White People Genetically Racist? Is Racism in White Peoples' Genes?
by TMMason 12 years ago
So I came across this the other day. Appearently Racism is genetic, along with alchoholism gays etc... and white people are the only ones to have ever had slaves. Okay... This man is just absurd and a great example of the education of Americans in this day.http://www.theblaze.com/stories/new-aud...
- 9
Are people serious when they claim that "white people don't suffer racism"?
by Poppy 7 years ago
Are people serious when they claim that "white people don't suffer racism"?I live in Tokyo, Japan. Today I went shopping and there was a store with signs all over it saying "no foreigners, f*** off", "no eating, no taking photos, sneaky foreigner" "f*** you...