<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Very Necessary Response to Masius</title>
	<atom:link href="http://wesleyanargus.com/2009/03/03/a-very-necessary-response-to-masius/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://wesleyanargus.com/2009/03/03/a-very-necessary-response-to-masius/</link>
	<description>Twice-weekly student newspaper of Wesleyan University in Middletown.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 08:35:52 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: anon</title>
		<link>http://wesleyanargus.com/2009/03/03/a-very-necessary-response-to-masius/comment-page-1/#comment-4442</link>
		<dc:creator>anon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 04:05:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wesleyanargus.com/?p=8771#comment-4442</guid>
		<description>well said, 1:28</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>well said,&nbsp;1:28</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://wesleyanargus.com/2009/03/03/a-very-necessary-response-to-masius/comment-page-1/#comment-4010</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Apr 2009 18:28:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wesleyanargus.com/?p=8771#comment-4010</guid>
		<description>This article and these comments are incredibly interesting. Not only for their content, but for what they say about the way we at Wesleyan discuss oppression. There seems to be a push and pull between those rebelling against the (sortof) leftist, academic terms of discussing oppression and those who want to analyze  issues of privilege. I think both of these sides have legitimate point. Sometimes in our hyper-critical world we can over-analyze situations or word choice to the point of absurdity. In many ways, this is counterproductive, even if the intentions are good. This analysis opens up less over-the-top analysis to criticism. Conversely, it is insane to cut off all critical thinking and introspection about privilege.

This the a beautiful example of Wesleyan tripping on itself.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This article and these comments are incredibly interesting. Not only for their content, but for what they say about the way we at Wesleyan discuss oppression. There seems to be a push and pull between those rebelling against the (sortof) leftist, academic terms of discussing oppression and those who want to analyze  issues of privilege. I think both of these sides have legitimate point. Sometimes in our hyper-critical world we can over-analyze situations or word choice to the point of absurdity. In many ways, this is counterproductive, even if the intentions are good. This analysis opens up less over-the-top analysis to criticism. Conversely, it is insane to cut off all critical thinking and introspection about&nbsp;privilege.</p>
<p>This the a beautiful example of Wesleyan tripping on&nbsp;itself.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sean</title>
		<link>http://wesleyanargus.com/2009/03/03/a-very-necessary-response-to-masius/comment-page-1/#comment-2821</link>
		<dc:creator>Sean</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:57:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wesleyanargus.com/?p=8771#comment-2821</guid>
		<description>Well said Trent. Way to be self and socially-aware</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well said Trent. Way to be self and&nbsp;socially-aware</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike LeVine</title>
		<link>http://wesleyanargus.com/2009/03/03/a-very-necessary-response-to-masius/comment-page-1/#comment-2003</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike LeVine</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 16:50:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wesleyanargus.com/?p=8771#comment-2003</guid>
		<description>&quot;The problem is not that Grandma was labeled “black” (although Dermont should have written Black) but why her race was mentioned. The races of the other workers Dermont speaks of were not mentioned.&quot;

Seriously? If I described someone as white, it&#039;d be much to vague for anyone to differentiate who I was talking about, unless everyone else was black. Have you ever tried to describe a person as &quot;white, average height, brown hair, brown eyes&quot;? No one will have any idea who you are talking about, since that description fits a huge group of people. To identify someone physically, you need use characteristics that stand out. If you skin color is different than the skin color of everyone else in the room, it&#039;s pretty easy to figure out who the person described as &quot;black&quot; is. If you are watching a college basketball game, and a white player is doing very well, you can almost always identify him as &quot;the white guy&quot;, because a majority of college basketball players are black. It goes both ways. Now, if the woman was described by a non-identifying characteristic, such as gay, then there would be a problem. That isn&#039;t the case here.

Really Trent, this is an unneccesary rant about nothing. Alot of my writing is unneccasary, unrealistic ranting, but this takes the cake.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>"The problem is not that Grandma was labeled “black” (although Dermont should have written Black) but why her race was mentioned. The races of the other workers Dermont speaks of were not&nbsp;mentioned."</p>
<p>Seriously? If I described someone as white, it'd be much to vague for anyone to differentiate who I was talking about, unless everyone else was black. Have you ever tried to describe a person as "white, average height, brown hair, brown eyes"? No one will have any idea who you are talking about, since that description fits a huge group of people. To identify someone physically, you need use characteristics that stand out. If you skin color is different than the skin color of everyone else in the room, it's pretty easy to figure out who the person described as "black" is. If you are watching a college basketball game, and a white player is doing very well, you can almost always identify him as "the white guy", because a majority of college basketball players are black. It goes both ways. Now, if the woman was described by a non-identifying characteristic, such as gay, then there would be a problem. That isn't the case&nbsp;here.</p>
<p>Really Trent, this is an unneccesary rant about nothing. Alot of my writing is unneccasary, unrealistic ranting, but this takes the&nbsp;cake.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://wesleyanargus.com/2009/03/03/a-very-necessary-response-to-masius/comment-page-1/#comment-2002</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 16:02:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wesleyanargus.com/?p=8771#comment-2002</guid>
		<description>Black is an identifying characteristic and American society is predominantly White (I&#039;m not saying this is good, but it is). 

For instance, should we not also call someone the &quot;tall guy,&quot; if they were over 6-5, just because they are a minority?  I&#039;m sure if we were in Africa and there was a nice old White lady who worked at the corner store, you&#039;d call her &quot;the old white lady.&quot;

Therefore it makes sense to use someones race to identify someone else.  

You try to address these critiques, &quot;It is not that race cannot be a useful way to describe someone, but that white folks often describe people of color simply by their race, erasing their existences as people who are Black, Latina/o, Asian/Asian American, etc.&quot;  So in this case, Dermot is actually using it to your satisfaction... He didn&#039;t write &quot;the Black working at MoCon.&quot;

I don&#039;t think Dermot would ever write that, and furthermore think he understands the potential racial connotations.

As with a lot of your Wespeaks, you are reading way to far into a rather innocuous comment and presenting a circular argument.

Oh and as a Latino, I&#039;m glad someone is labeling me exotic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Black is an identifying characteristic and American society is predominantly White (I'm not saying this is good, but it&nbsp;is). </p>
<p>For instance, should we not also call someone the "tall guy," if they were over 6-5, just because they are a minority?  I'm sure if we were in Africa and there was a nice old White lady who worked at the corner store, you'd call her "the old white&nbsp;lady."</p>
<p>Therefore it makes sense to use someones race to identify someone&nbsp;else.  </p>
<p>You try to address these critiques, "It is not that race cannot be a useful way to describe someone, but that white folks often describe people of color simply by their race, erasing their existences as people who are Black, Latina/o, Asian/Asian American, etc."  So in this case, Dermot is actually using it to your satisfaction... He didn't write "the Black working at&nbsp;MoCon."</p>
<p>I don't think Dermot would ever write that, and furthermore think he understands the potential racial&nbsp;connotations.</p>
<p>As with a lot of your Wespeaks, you are reading way to far into a rather innocuous comment and presenting a circular&nbsp;argument.</p>
<p>Oh and as a Latino, I'm glad someone is labeling me&nbsp;exotic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stop being so butthurt</title>
		<link>http://wesleyanargus.com/2009/03/03/a-very-necessary-response-to-masius/comment-page-1/#comment-1983</link>
		<dc:creator>Stop being so butthurt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 06:30:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wesleyanargus.com/?p=8771#comment-1983</guid>
		<description>BAAAAAWWW</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span class="caps">BAAAAAWWW</span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fail</title>
		<link>http://wesleyanargus.com/2009/03/03/a-very-necessary-response-to-masius/comment-page-1/#comment-1969</link>
		<dc:creator>fail</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 23:12:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wesleyanargus.com/?p=8771#comment-1969</guid>
		<description>&quot;systemicity&quot;

this word alone will eradicate prejudice.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>"systemicity"</p>
<p>this word alone will eradicate&nbsp;prejudice.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
