• Exocrinous@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    10 months ago

    White people don’t need to be represented in a flag, because white people are already represented everywhere.

    FFS this is some all lives matter bullshit.

    • ???@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      Lol please, I’m not complaining about white people not being in there as much as I mean to criticize that you can’t represent everyone on a flag by skin color. That would have to be every color. I think it’s ridiculous to even aspire to add these extra colors, because it negates what the rainbow is supposed to represent,

      • Exocrinous@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        All human skin colours (including “white”) are shades of brown. The flag has a brown stripe for people of colour.

        • ???@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          10 months ago

          So if white is a shade of brown, then why is that stripe there? To signify what? That we all have skin?

          • Exocrinous@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            The social construct of whiteness excludes so-called white people from having “colour” or “brownness”. These are objectively untrue of people with pale skin, because cream is a colour and a shade of brown. But white supremacists and white culture at large deny objective reality, and substitute their own. This is why the term “people of colour” is able to exist. If it weren’t for racists pretending white isn’t a colour, it wouldn’t make sense. In society, white people are privileged by being treated as though they do not have race. The privilege of being white is never having to think about your race if you don’t want to. It’s the default. If you say “a worker” or “a politician” or “a firefighter” or “a woman” or “a gay person”, society teaches people to think of a white person in all of those cases. Being nonwhite is considered a character trait, and being white isn’t. People of colour were often given less depth in older movies, and excluded from being the protagonist, and that’s still happening, because society says whiteness is the default. That whiteness… isn’t a characteristic. Within this social context, a brown line which is objectively the colour of “white skin”, subjectively excludes white people due to their social privilege.

            • ???@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              I don’t want a flag that doesn’t include everyone for some weird queer theory or hetronormative analysis reason. 🙂😉

              And that’s why the rainbow is enough. It speaks beyond all these complications. Adding brown to it implies that brown people were not part of the rainbow, that more need to be added. All we really needed to do was indicate that brown people like any people fall under the same gay flag, regardless of the current existing social dynamic relating to race.

              • Exocrinous@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                10 months ago

                If the rainbow had been enough, then we wouldn’t have ended up with racist queers in the community. That’s why the rest of us decided to send a clearer message. Are you interested in sending a clear message?