Guilt by Association and Victimhood by Association

This post is in response to the facebook conversation with the Asian-American woman linked here:


http://smolyhokes.blogspot.com/2016/07/facebook-conversation-with-asian.html

http://smolyhokes.blogspot.com/2016/07/asian-american-females-white-husbands.html


This woman (and her husband) seemed either incapable or unwilling to have a rational discussion. Continuing the discussion would have been as pointless as trying to teach a pig to sing. (For those not familiar with the idiom: “Never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.”) For those willing to engage their brains a bit, let's consider her unsupported accusations.

The problem identified had to do with police and black men. But, this Asian-American female (xxx) almost effortlessly (how many words did it take?)  conflates problems of black Americans with problems of women.  (Note that xxx does not respond to my question about why white men are any more responsible than Asian females for the interactions of  police and black men.)  This conflation attempts to acquire additional victimhood status by coupling women's issues with black racial issues as if they were similar and commensurate problems. They are both problems, but they are not commensurate and there are far more differences than similarities.Women's issues need to be judged on their own merits, without attempting to couple them to black racial issues. This woman's comments seem to have the primary intent of trying to appropriate additional victimhood status by association with black racial problems. Otherwise, why immediately try and tie the two together in this instance?

Inasmuch as most Americans consider the slavery that existed in the past and the racism that persists to this day as the most reprehensible part of our history, associating women's issues with racism tends to put them on the same level. Although this conflation may be positive for women's issues, the conflation tends to diminish the problem of racism by putting it on the same level as women's issues. Perhaps this is the reason that it is quite common for women's groups to conflate sexism and racism but far less common (rare?) for racial justice groups to put women's issues and racism on the same level?

There are some very serious women's problems to deal with. But the women's movement also is spending an inordinate amount of effort on relatively trivial issues; the racial justice movement is not.  Unjustified killings of black males and unequal incarceration and sentencing for the same crime are a much more serious issue than "trigger warnings," "safe spaces," and girlie calendars.

Black males seem to have far more problematic interactions with police than females of any race and males of any non-black race. If some kind of "privilege" claim is necessary, the "privilege" in this case is "non-black privilege." It certainly has nothing to do with "male privilege" because males of any race seem to have more problematic interactions with police than females of the corresponding race. So, "female privilege" might be appropriate in this instance, but not "male privilege." Does anybody have any evidence that Asian males have more problematic interactions with police than white males? Why isn't this "Asian privilege?" Does anybody doubt that Asian females have the fewest problematic interactions with police? In this instance, why isn't this "Asian female privilege?"

Rather than engage in a rational conversation, this woman assigned guilt by association to me and victimhood by association to herself.