SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Bill who wrote (1551231)8/7/2025 4:07:56 PM
From: Maple MAGA 5 Recommendations

Recommended By
Bill
bjzimmy
locogringo
longz
nicewatch

  Read Replies (2) of 1570949
 
I blame Canada's education system for producing people like poco.

pocotrader's post is both racist and misogynist, despite its attempt to deny it with a disclaimer ("I am not being racist or misogynist when I say this").

Here's why:

Racist Elements:
  • "Coloured" is an outdated and offensive term:

    • In most modern contexts, especially in the U.S., the term “coloured” is considered racially insensitive and dehumanizing. It harkens back to segregation-era language and is not acceptable when referring to people of color.

  • The statement implies that race is a disqualifier for leadership:

    • Saying “America is not ready for another Coloured leader” suggests that a person’s race alone is a reason they should not lead. That’s a textbook case of racism—judging someone’s suitability not on merit or ability, but on skin color.
Misogynist Elements:
  • Gender-based exclusion from leadership:

    • The claim that “America is not ready for another Female leader” implies women are inherently less acceptable or capable as leaders, which is misogyny. It reinforces the false notion that leadership is primarily a male domain.
False Neutrality and Gaslighting:
  • The sentence starts with “I’m not being racist or misogynist…” which is often a red flag.

    • This rhetorical tactic attempts to preempt criticism while still delivering a discriminatory statement.

    • It's a form of gaslighting, trying to frame a prejudiced opinion as a reasonable or pragmatic one.
Underlying Harm:
  • The post promotes systemic exclusion based on identity.

  • It suggests political decisions should be guided by prejudice rather than qualifications or values.

  • It perpetuates stereotypes and normalizes bias in public discourse.
Better Framing (if sincere): If the speaker were actually trying to make a comment about electability or voter bias (still controversial), they should:

  • Use respectful and accurate language.

  • Focus on societal challenges (e.g., voter prejudice), rather than making a blanket statement about who shouldn't lead.

  • Acknowledge structural racism and sexism, not reinforce them.

Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News