What is it about the rhetoric of “safe” language that is so ever-present?  I found myself sitting in a room today with a number of graduate students, you know, those who are supposedly the most exacting, most thoughtful, and most articulate in all of society.  The hilarity of the segregation in the room: “international” (read: black, asian, and indian) students on one side, middle-aged white women on the other, and me and my laptop sitting somewhere in the middle (not to suggest that my views are moderate or of “the middle”).  But more worrisome is the conversation of the white middle-aged women; when speaking of housing locations certain areas were considered “not the greatest” when what they meant was “black ghetto”.  Why did these women not say “black ghetto”?  Is that racist?  Is it racist to identify systemic oppression and segregation by using politically charged language?  The irony of the situation is that these women merely couched their racist beliefs in “safe” language, whereas a brash imbecile would have called out the systemic oppression and segregation, and lauded them as coherent with his or her racist views.  At least the open racist came to his or her beliefs honestly, and offers a target for education and information, but the white middle-aged women would have, invariably, responded that “oh, I’m not racist” even though they don’t want to live anywhere near “them”.

(via textual metanoia)