zlacker

>>elsewh+(OP)
The irony in this is that this type of language about "inclusivity" only really appeals to a narrow subset of upper middle class white people.

>>travis+jo
You will be quickly disabused of this notion if you talk to poor and/or brown people. While I’m sure that you can find occasional individuals who do not care about inclusivity, the large majority do care.

The attitude that your comment reflects crops up a lot in relation to, for example, the Washington Redskins naming controversy. Folks who like the current name are always bringing up a couple of examples of Native Americans who say they “don’t care” about the name, and claiming that it’s really only white liberals who are offended; meanwhile, in my experience, the large majority of Natives actually do care very much, and are upset that a racial slur used for their ethnicity is being used as the name of a sports team.

>>iron00+Z01
> The attitude that your comment reflects crops up a lot in relation to, for example, the Washington Redskins naming controversy. Folks who like the current name are always bringing up a couple of examples of Native Americans who say they “don’t care” about the name, and claiming that it’s really only white liberals who are offended; meanwhile, in my experience, the large majority of Natives actually do care very much, and are upset that a racial slur used for their ethnicity is being used as the name of a sports team.

I found this comment rather funny, because if CGP Grey is correct [0] the preferred term by American Indians is "American Indian", NOT "Native American". So you're claiming knowledge of the general opinion of a group, while not using the group's preferred name for themselves.

0: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kh88fVP2FWQ

>>DuskSt+Qe1
The attempt at a “gotcha” is annoying. I can only speak from my lived experience as a white person who grew up on a reservation. I married a native, and almost all my closest friends were (and are) natives. Everyone I knew called themselves “native” or “Native American”. “American Indian” wouldn’t have been considered offensive (unlike “redskin”), but it really wasn’t the common parlance. The only place one would routinely see the phrase “American Indian” is on government paperwork, eg from the BIA.

This is one of those things you can find out for yourself: go to a pow-wow (non-native visitors are typically very welcome) and ask the people there how they usually refer to themselves.

>>iron00+hn1
That'd be evidence for CGPGrey being wrong, then. But I'd still love to see statistics on what proportion of people found the existence of the Redskins to be offensive.