GWB's New Neighborhood Barred Non-Whites Until 2000

SpringcurlSpringcurl Posts: 8,002Registered Users
As was reported this week, George Bush has bought a new house in a wealthy part of Dallas, called Preston Hollow, to live in after he leaves office. Preston Hollow homeowners are used to having well-known neighbors; the area is already home to Dallas Mavericks' owner Marc Cuban and former presidential candidate Ross Perot. And while many of the Bushes' new neighbors seem perfectly happy and excited to welcome the former first couple, a few of them, reports the Wall Street Journal, have some significant reservations:
The impending presence of a former President is ratcheting up security fears. "I am afraid with all the negative press the president has been getting, the whole neighborhood is going to be a target," said a woman, who wouldn't give her name. She carried her King Charles spaniel Friday past the Bushes' new abode.
But Raw Story reports that the area had some issues long before Bush made it his new home.
Until 2000, the neighborhood association's covenant said only white people were allowed to live there, though an exception was made for servants. The document, enacted in 1956, reads:
"Said property shall be used and occupied by white persons only except these covenants shall not prevent occupancy by domestic servants of different race or nationality in the employ of a tenant."
TWINKLES.gifTWINKLES.gifTWINKLES.gif

Obamacare is not a blueprint for socialism. You're thinking of the New Testament. ~~ John Fugelsang



«13

Comments

  • Nappy_curly_crownNappy_curly_crown Posts: 4,162Registered Users Curl Connoisseur
    why am i sooo not surprised.
    Wanna talk products? Come Join us here!
    http://www.facebook.com/PlatinumPJ

    Extremely thick, kinky curls/coils that have a mind of thier own!!!!
    _____________________________
    I like my men and my hair....KINKY!!!!
    _____________________________
    Wanna save $10 off your next purchase at vitacost.com? Use my referal code (click the link)!


    12459237.png
    Created by MyFitnessPal.com - Free Calorie Counter
  • RedCatWavesRedCatWaves Posts: 31,259Registered Users Curl Connoisseur
    Is the former "whites only" thing really a surprise. Texas isn't known for it's tolerance, and, honestly, lots of upper crust private clubs still descriminate, in many states (most often the "red" states). One of the Republican's new darlings, Katon Dawson, was a member of a whites-only country club in SC til just a couple months ago.

    I don't care where Bush lives. Texas can have him. I hope he never comes out of his house again.
  • SpringcurlSpringcurl Posts: 8,002Registered Users
    I don't care where Bush lives. Texas can have him. I hope he never comes out of his house again.

    +1
    TWINKLES.gifTWINKLES.gifTWINKLES.gif

    Obamacare is not a blueprint for socialism. You're thinking of the New Testament. ~~ John Fugelsang



  • NayaNaya Posts: 922Registered Users
    I'm not surprised. Also, am I the only minority who feels like "WHO CARES?"

    If people are going to go through that much trouble to keep me out, hell, I probably don't want or need to be there. They won't have clothes that fit me right (need room for the booty and hips) hair products for a curly girl or restaurants with food that tastes good. I'd rather stick to diverse less exclusive areas where people don't care about such nonsense and the tension is low. Racists can keep their clubs... I'm all set. :pr:
    BC: May 2008
    Hair Type:
    3C/4A mix I think
    http://members.fotki.com/RizadaMinicana
    Not Updated D:

    Vegan-ish

    s-event.png
  • YolyCYolyC Posts: 3,758Registered Users
    Springcurl wrote: »
    I don't care where Bush lives. Texas can have him. I hope he never comes out of his house again.

    +1

    +1 more
    Location: Chicago

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    "If you don't stand for something you will fall for anything."
    Malcolm X
  • curlyjenn10curlyjenn10 Posts: 2,034Registered Users
    I don't see why this matters.
    CG since 6/15/08!
    Medium-Fine/Normal Porosity

    http://collegecurly.blogspot.com/
  • MimsTXMimsTX Posts: 3,482Registered Users Curl Neophyte
    Trust me, there are plenty of people in this neck of the woods (Dallas area... god knows, I can't afford to live in Preston Hollow to begin with) that aren't too keen on the fact that he's living here.

    As for the community's racist requirements... do you REALLY think Bush actually READ something about the neighborhood he was moving into? lol, I think that might be giving him too much credit. He probably doesn't have a clue about any of it.
    CG/Mod CG (soap bars) since 8/12/08
    CO wash/Cond: Kathymack & Flowermoon Castille soap bars, V05 Chamomile Tea, Suave Ocean Breeze, Biolage Conditioning Balm
    Styling loves: DIFFUSING! CK, KCNT, KCCC, FOTE (on dry hair only), Re:coil, Proclaim gel
    Not sure about: Boots, Tweek, KBB Milk, DMHJ
    HATE: plopping, FOTE on wet hair, BRHG
  • Oriental CurlOriental Curl Posts: 201Registered Users
    Sorry if this is guano, but is it just that I have a different perspective on this because I'm not American?

    In South Africa we would (because it's a highly sensitive topic because of our recent history) find this extremely offensive. People (of all races) would be incenced, I'm sure. I know I'm horrified. I find it appalling that that sort of discrimination could be a part of a tenancy agreement. How common is this today?

    This is apartheid as far as I'm concerned, just not one written into national law.
    Hair: LOTS of fine hair, mainly variations of 2 (FIA), now cut into a just-above-the-shoulder layered bob.

    Products: MOP C-System Curl Enhancing shampoo
    Original Source conditioners for co-washing and conditioning
    MOP C-System Curl Defining Cream
    Boots clear gel and/or Joico Joiwhip
    Joico Curl Activator on the second day.
  • afrosheenqueenafrosheenqueen Posts: 5,400Registered Users Curl Connoisseur
    Restrictive covenants that haven't been rewritten are everywhere. In Kansas City the KC Star found restrictive covenants barring Blacks and Jews still written into the contracts of suburban neighborhoods. This was in 2005.
    4a/b Texlaxed hair w/ highlights. Medium texture & high porosity.

    HG's: CJ Daily Fix, Bobeam Cheris Hibiscus shampoo bar, KC Spiral Spritz, Knot Today, CJ Rehab, KBB LL Hair Mask, Cassia, KCCC, oil blend of Avocado, Camellia, Jojoba, & Meadowfoam oils

    SL APL BSL MBL
  • journotravelerjournotraveler Posts: 2,816Registered Users
    I don't see why this matters.

    are you saying you don't see why this matters because bush's new neighborhood no longer has a racial restrictive covenant in place? or because you don't have a problem with restrictive covenants that discriminate based on race/ethnicity?
    In urban centers restrictive covenants, which first became popular in the late nineteenth century, created segregated neighborhoods. Such covenants took the form of contracts between home owners prohibiting the sale of real estate to nonwhites and often to Jews and other ethnic groups. Because these covenants were private agreements, there appeared to be no direct state action in creating segregated neighborhoods and thus no violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. Such covenants were especially common in the North, where segregation was often illegal. For example, both Michigan and Illinois prohibited segregation, but in Detroit and Chicago, restrictive covenants created neighborhoods segregated by race and ethnicity.

    The United States Supreme Court inhibited the use of restrictive covenants in Shelley v. Kraemer (1948). The
    Court conceded that the covenants themselves constituted private action and therefore did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment. However, because state courts enforced the covenants, the Court found unconstitutional state action.

    In Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer, Co. (1968), the Court agreed that the 1866 Civil Rights Act prohibited “all discrimination against Negroes in the sale or rental of property—discrimination by private owners as well as discrimination by public authorities.” The Court found that the Enforcement Clause (section 2) of the Thirteenth Amendment empowered Congress to prohibit housing discrimination by private individuals.


    source: answers.com.
    3B corkscrews with scatterings of 3A & 3C.
  • curlyjenn10curlyjenn10 Posts: 2,034Registered Users
    I don't see why this matters.

    are you saying you don't see why this matters because bush's new neighborhood no longer has a racial restrictive covenant in place? or because you don't have a problem with restrictive covenants that discriminate based on race/ethnicity?
    In urban centers restrictive covenants, which first became popular in the late nineteenth century, created segregated neighborhoods. Such covenants took the form of contracts between home owners prohibiting the sale of real estate to nonwhites and often to Jews and other ethnic groups. Because these covenants were private agreements, there appeared to be no direct state action in creating segregated neighborhoods and thus no violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. Such covenants were especially common in the North, where segregation was often illegal. For example, both Michigan and Illinois prohibited segregation, but in Detroit and Chicago, restrictive covenants created neighborhoods segregated by race and ethnicity.

    The United States Supreme Court inhibited the use of restrictive covenants in Shelley v. Kraemer (1948). The
    Court conceded that the covenants themselves constituted private action and therefore did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment. However, because state courts enforced the covenants, the Court found unconstitutional state action.

    In Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer, Co. (1968), the Court agreed that the 1866 Civil Rights Act prohibited “all discrimination against Negroes in the sale or rental of property—discrimination by private owners as well as discrimination by public authorities.” The Court found that the Enforcement Clause (section 2) of the Thirteenth Amendment empowered Congress to prohibit housing discrimination by private individuals.


    source: answers.com.

    The first one. I don't agree with them having one in the first place, or for waiting until 2000 to remove it. But it's no longer there. They're moving forward (finally, it seems).

    I don't think anyone would have made a big deal about it if it were Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, or even Obama. I don't think it's fair to judge the Bushes on something they had nothing to do with, as has been implied in this thread. I also don't think it matters because no one cares about Bush. He's leaving - focus on the future.
    CG since 6/15/08!
    Medium-Fine/Normal Porosity

    http://collegecurly.blogspot.com/
  • journotravelerjournotraveler Posts: 2,816Registered Users
    thanks for the clarification, curlyjenn
    I don't think anyone would have made a big deal about it if it were Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, or even Obama. I don't think it's fair to judge the Bushes on something they had nothing to do with, as has been implied in this thread. I also don't think it matters because no one cares about Bush. He's leaving - focus on the future.

    actually, i think there would be a big deal made out of it. because they'd be moving into a neighborhood that just 8 years before, they would have been restricted from moving into.
    3B corkscrews with scatterings of 3A & 3C.
  • Myradella3Myradella3 Posts: 2,481Registered Users
    I agree, it doesn't matter what the Bushes are doing. Covenants like that were so common in the south that it's not unusual to see. Even if they knew that it used to exist, what would not buying there mean or do?
  • curlyjenn10curlyjenn10 Posts: 2,034Registered Users
    thanks for the clarification, curlyjenn
    I don't think anyone would have made a big deal about it if it were Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, or even Obama. I don't think it's fair to judge the Bushes on something they had nothing to do with, as has been implied in this thread. I also don't think it matters because no one cares about Bush. He's leaving - focus on the future.

    actually, i think there would be a big deal made out of it. because they'd be moving into a neighborhood that just 8 years before, they would have been restricted from moving into.

    You're right. I think it would definitely be a more positive light for a non-white politician than for a white one. Almost a double-standard.
    CG since 6/15/08!
    Medium-Fine/Normal Porosity

    http://collegecurly.blogspot.com/
  • nynaeve77nynaeve77 Posts: 7,135Registered Users Curl Novice
    I don't care where Bush lives. Texas can have him.

    But some of us don't want him!
    "Maybe Lucy's right. Of all the Charlie Browns in the world, you're the Charlie Browniest."--Linus, A Charlie Brown Christmas


    My fotki: http://public.fotki.com/nynaeve77/
    Password: orphanannie
  • RedCatWavesRedCatWaves Posts: 31,259Registered Users Curl Connoisseur
    nynaeve77 wrote: »
    I don't care where Bush lives. Texas can have him.

    But some of us don't want him!



    Too bad! You and the Dixie Chicks are stuck with him.
  • fraufrau Posts: 6,130Registered Users Curl Neophyte
    having lived in california, new jersey and georgia, i find the south more open for blacks than the other states.
    there is far more racism in the north than the south.
    in georgia, if you have the money you can live anywhere. not true in new jersey.

    there is a saying:
    in the south they don't care how close you get just don't get too big
    in the north they don't care how big you get just don't get too close

    too big = blacks getting too successful
    too close = blacks living next to you
  • RedCatWavesRedCatWaves Posts: 31,259Registered Users Curl Connoisseur
    frau wrote: »
    having lived in california, new jersey and georgia, i find the south more open for blacks than the other states.
    there is far more racism in the north than the south.
    in georgia, if you have the money you can live anywhere. not true in new jersey.

    there is a saying:
    in the south they don't care how close you get just don't get too big
    in the north they don't care how big you get just don't get too close

    too big = blacks getting too successful
    too close = blacks living next to you


    Having grown up in NJ, and lived all over it for 40-something years, I didn't find that true at all. I've lived next door to black folks, in nice neighborhoods. It wasn't a problem for anyone that I noticed. I lived always in suburbs. Maybe it's different in cities.
  • nynaeve77nynaeve77 Posts: 7,135Registered Users Curl Novice
    nynaeve77 wrote: »
    I don't care where Bush lives. Texas can have him.

    But some of us don't want him!



    Too bad! You and the Dixie Chicks are stuck with him.

    Ya know, if my in-laws weren't so annoying, I'd move to Oregon (that's where DH grew up) in a heartbeat. It's hard to say which is the lesser of two evils in this situation, though.
    "Maybe Lucy's right. Of all the Charlie Browns in the world, you're the Charlie Browniest."--Linus, A Charlie Brown Christmas


    My fotki: http://public.fotki.com/nynaeve77/
    Password: orphanannie
  • Oriental CurlOriental Curl Posts: 201Registered Users
    Restrictive covenants that haven't been rewritten are everywhere. In Kansas City the KC Star found restrictive covenants barring Blacks and Jews still written into the contracts of suburban neighborhoods. This was in 2005.

    Thanks for the info, afrosheenqueen. Very interesting reading. I guess I shouldn't be surprised, but I still am.

    So let me get something straight. These restrictive covenants still exist in tenancy agreements (even though they're now illegal) simply because they've never been removed. And, of course, the historical consequences of them have led to de facto segregated neighbourhoods today. But what I want to know is, are these covenants still being enforced, even indirectly (i.e., through practice, ignoring the law)? Are there still places which turn away non-white tenants purely on an ethnic basis? Or is it more subtle than that? Are you just 'not the kind of person that they want to have living here'? Or has this all been eliminated now? <running to find law journals with more up-to-date cases now>
    Hair: LOTS of fine hair, mainly variations of 2 (FIA), now cut into a just-above-the-shoulder layered bob.

    Products: MOP C-System Curl Enhancing shampoo
    Original Source conditioners for co-washing and conditioning
    MOP C-System Curl Defining Cream
    Boots clear gel and/or Joico Joiwhip
    Joico Curl Activator on the second day.
  • NetGNetG Posts: 8,116Registered Users
    Restrictive covenants that haven't been rewritten are everywhere. In Kansas City the KC Star found restrictive covenants barring Blacks and Jews still written into the contracts of suburban neighborhoods. This was in 2005.

    Thanks for the info, afrosheenqueen. Very interesting reading. I guess I shouldn't be surprised, but I still am.

    So let me get something straight. These restrictive covenants still exist in tenancy agreements (even though they're now illegal) simply because they've never been removed. And, of course, the historical consequences of them have led to de facto segregated neighbourhoods today. But what I want to know is, are these covenants still being enforced, even indirectly (i.e., through practice, ignoring the law)? Are there still places which turn away non-white tenants purely on an ethnic basis? Or is it more subtle than that? Are you just 'not the kind of person that they want to have living here'? Or has this all been eliminated now? <running to find law journals with more up-to-date cases now>


    I grew up in a neighborhood where they hadn't taken the restrictions against Jews off the books. They just figured hey, it wasn't enforceable or legal to follow - so ignore it. There were no attempts to keep my parents from moving in or get us to move out or make us feel unwelcome. However, we were some of the only Jews in the area. At the time my parents moved in it wasn't a very populated area, but the prettiest geographically. I always did feel like I was a bit "different" because all the other kids celebrated Christmas, but my mom coming into class to make latkes and getting presents for 8 days instead of 1 made them think I was cool for being different. :)
    The pews never miss a sermon but that doesn't get them one step closer to Heaven.
    -Speckla

    But at least the pews never attend yoga!
  • journotravelerjournotraveler Posts: 2,816Registered Users
    frau wrote: »
    having lived in california, new jersey and georgia, i find the south more open for blacks than the other states.
    there is far more racism in the north than the south.
    in georgia, if you have the money you can live anywhere. not true in new jersey.

    there is a saying:
    in the south they don't care how close you get just don't get too big
    in the north they don't care how big you get just don't get too close

    too big = blacks getting too successful
    too close = blacks living next to you


    Having grown up in NJ, and lived all over it for 40-something years, I didn't find that true at all. I've lived next door to black folks, in nice neighborhoods. It wasn't a problem for anyone that I noticed. I lived always in suburbs. Maybe it's different in cities.

    actually, when my family moved to staten island in '68, my parents said the klan was still burning crosses. my parents looked at an apartment there, and later, a cross was burned in front of the building. granted, that was 40 years ago, but...
    3B corkscrews with scatterings of 3A & 3C.
  • A_la_Nap-turalA_la_Nap-tural Posts: 409Registered Users
    I moved to NYC in June. Lucky me, I got away just in time! Literally, I lived 5 minutes from this area in Dallas. I passed it every morning going to work.

    Here's the great thing about that area.... they're so rich, that they voted to secede from Dallas. Park Cities (University Park, Highland Park), which is where the Preston area(s) is(are) located, is a city within Dallas. It stands alone and is separate from the structure of Dallas (schools, police & other public services, taxes, etc...). It's also 95.14% white, as opposed to Dallas as a whole being very diverse. In short, if you have enough money, you can keep anybody out of your neighborhood.... until they're making just as much as you! Then, they become your neighbors:wave:

    But I agree with Frau... there is just as much, if not more racism here in the North. And it's not just white against black, it's "X" against everyone who is "Non-X". I moved here thinking that New Yorkers would be accepting since it's a big melting pot... not true. When I experienced racism from an Italian, I was shocked. But not as shocked when I overheard a Puerto Rican girl saying how she didn't want her brother to marry a Dominican girl because they're babies would come out dark? What tha? I'm thinking... you both speak spanish don't ya... bleed red blood.... breathe the same air.... oh. For a second there, I thought your brother was marrying another species!

    I'm sure, the nation as a whole has racists widespread. But with the technology, ignorance spreads faster and now they can link up and share hate tactics via web blogs.
    www.thenaturalknowitall.com

    www.mixology101.ning.com
    I'm luvin' my natural self FIRST! :love7:

    "And if you don't want to be down with me, you don't want to pick from my appletree."-Erykah Badu


    event.png


  • A_la_Nap-turalA_la_Nap-tural Posts: 409Registered Users
    frau wrote: »
    having lived in california, new jersey and georgia, i find the south more open for blacks than the other states.
    there is far more racism in the north than the south.
    in georgia, if you have the money you can live anywhere. not true in new jersey.

    there is a saying:
    in the south they don't care how close you get just don't get too big
    in the north they don't care how big you get just don't get too close

    too big = blacks getting too successful
    too close = blacks living next to you


    Having grown up in NJ, and lived all over it for 40-something years, I didn't find that true at all. I've lived next door to black folks, in nice neighborhoods. It wasn't a problem for anyone that I noticed. I lived always in suburbs. Maybe it's different in cities.

    I think it's perception. When it's not in your nature to discriminate, or you haven't been discriminated against, the subtle system can go un-noticed. But when the role is reversed, and you've only lived from the perspective of the person receiving the discrimination, you become sensitive to it. It's a lot easier to pick up on, even when it's happening to someone else.
    www.thenaturalknowitall.com

    www.mixology101.ning.com
    I'm luvin' my natural self FIRST! :love7:

    "And if you don't want to be down with me, you don't want to pick from my appletree."-Erykah Badu


    event.png


  • SleighSleigh Posts: 1,226Registered Users
    frau wrote: »
    having lived in california, new jersey and georgia, i find the south more open for blacks than the other states.
    there is far more racism in the north than the south.
    in georgia, if you have the money you can live anywhere. not true in new jersey.

    there is a saying:
    in the south they don't care how close you get just don't get too big
    in the north they don't care how big you get just don't get too close

    too big = blacks getting too successful
    too close = blacks living next to you


    Having grown up in NJ, and lived all over it for 40-something years, I didn't find that true at all. I've lived next door to black folks, in nice neighborhoods. It wasn't a problem for anyone that I noticed. I lived always in suburbs. Maybe it's different in cities.

    I think it's perception. When it's not in your nature to discriminate, or you haven't been discriminated against, the subtle system can go un-noticed. But when the role is reversed, and you've only lived from the perspective of the person receiving the discrimination, you become sensitive to it. It's a lot easier to pick up on, even when it's happening to someone else.

    frau, i've heard and seen that.

    what's the other saying - in the north they're nice to your face but rude behind your back, in the south they're rude to your face and nice behind your back.

    something like that.
    2c hair. maybe a little porous? my hair likes suave, vo5 and the big tease. going to be trying more lush soon. not sure how i feel about dr bronners.

    letting my hair be natural again after getting it straightened. yeah yeah, im a traitor :pirate:
  • fraufrau Posts: 6,130Registered Users Curl Neophyte
    now redcatwaves, i can say with all honesty that you are one of my favorite posters here so you know i don't want to offend you. BUT you know good and got darn well that there are some racists folks up in new jersey. to even try to pretend otherwise is so...dishonest. don't even go there and try to give me some b.s. about how you weren't raised this or that way and how you've never seen, blah, blahdie, blah, blah. bullsht and you know it!! you know it. why do white folks do this?

    i know, right now you're reading my words and you're getting choked up cause i don't believe you and you think i think you're racist. no, that's not what i'm saying.

    here's what i think:
    you may not dislike blacks. you may not mind dating black men or living next to black people. BUT you know that you have friends, perhaps family, associates or even been in ear shot of people who don't like blacks or hispanics. you know you've heard how people don't like driving in this neighborhood or are fearful of that neighborhood or don't like blacks or only like certain black people or say racist things or discriminate.
    this is what i think white folks do; they themselves practice being fair but know racist people and hear racist remarks but because those things or words are said behind closed doors, you want to act like it's not really harmful. those words translate in action. no white person in nj ever invited me to their home. never. well, my girlfriend who is half-irish half-mexican did.

    i have so many more meaningful relationships here in georgia with white people than i ever did in jersey.

    there are clearly neighborhoods that are hostile to blacks!! there are italians that hate blacks. are you serious? how is it that there are sections of newark that are almost exclusively italian/portuguese? is that because blacks like to live in the ghetto? how do you get segregated neighborhoods?

    here let me make it clearer:
    2007 hate crimes
    new jersey - 748
    georgia - 13

    'nuff said
  • fraufrau Posts: 6,130Registered Users Curl Neophyte
    and new jersey is the 4th or 5th most segregated state in the country. with newark being somewhere between the 2nd and 5th most segregated city in the nation.

    from nytimes article:
    New Jersey is now one of the four most segregated states in the nation and one of only two states in which the level of racial segregation increased between 1968 and 1980. The other is New York.
  • MichelleBFTMichelleBFT Posts: 4,812Registered Users
    here's what i think:
    you may not dislike blacks. you may not mind dating black men or living next to black people.

    I can't speak for anyone else, but I find this attitude really offensive. As though white people think that as long as they themselves aren't racist that they don't think racism exists.

    RCW was pretty specific: she had seen the exact opposite of what you were describing, but also said that it could be different in different areas. Your attitude as though she's pretending racism doesn't happen is completely rude.
    "And politically correct is the worst term, not just because it’s dismissive, but because it narrows down the whole social justice spectrum to this idea that it’s about being polite instead of about dismantling the oppressive social structure of power.
    Fun Fact: When you actively avoid being “PC,” you’re not being forward-thinking or unique. You’re buying into systems of oppression that have existed since before you were even born, and you’re keeping those systems in place."
    Stolen.
  • fraufrau Posts: 6,130Registered Users Curl Neophyte
    well michelle, i don't care. to live in new jersey and come to the conclusion that there isn't racism there is pretending.

    her words:
    Having grown up in NJ, and lived all over it for 40-something years, I didn't find that true at all. I've lived next door to black folks, in nice neighborhoods. It wasn't a problem for anyone that I noticed. I lived always in suburbs. Maybe it's different in cities.

    maybe she was living under a rock? who knows.
  • MichelleBFTMichelleBFT Posts: 4,812Registered Users
    frau wrote: »
    well michelle, i don't care. to live in new jersey and come to the conclusion that there isn't racism there is pretending.

    her words:
    Having grown up in NJ, and lived all over it for 40-something years, I didn't find that true at all. I've lived next door to black folks, in nice neighborhoods. It wasn't a problem for anyone that I noticed. I lived always in suburbs. Maybe it's different in cities.
    maybe she was living under a rock? who knows.

    If that's how it is for you, fine. I find it ludicrous and offensive, but you don't have to give a sh t about that. Says quite a lot about you as a person, though.
    "And politically correct is the worst term, not just because it’s dismissive, but because it narrows down the whole social justice spectrum to this idea that it’s about being polite instead of about dismantling the oppressive social structure of power.
    Fun Fact: When you actively avoid being “PC,” you’re not being forward-thinking or unique. You’re buying into systems of oppression that have existed since before you were even born, and you’re keeping those systems in place."
    Stolen.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file