• Rottcodd@lemmy.world
    14·
    1 year ago

    I suppose one could. I have no idea why anyone but an emotionally disturbed moron would though.

    It seems sort of like condemning punching yourself in the nose while punching yourself in the eye - it’s like you somehow managed to both get the point and miss it completely, at the same time.

  • fubo@lemmy.world
    9·
    1 year ago

    Sure. Human beings are not constrained to be equally awesome (or non-awesome) about everything, nor to be perfectly reflectively consistent. There are plenty of people who are idiotic malicious bigots about only one or a few subjects.

  • aCosmicWave@lemm.ee
    8·
    1 year ago

    Yes, this is what the + and - are for! One could be LGBTQ-Blacks for example.

    I will say that you have to be really careful with your order of operations if you happen to be racist against two or more minorities though.

    For instance, LGBTQ(-Muslims)(-Jews) would imply that you support both Muslims and Jews due to the rules of multiplication. Since most racists are not good at math it is recommended for you to only target one minority as the primary object of your hate whenever possible.

  • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘@infosec.pubEnglish
    3·
    1 year ago

    Yes. One can be against blacks, for example, but love LGBTQIA+ folks.

    LGBTQIA+ individuals are not a race. They are a sexual orientation or a gender orientation. One who is against them, is a sexist.

    A racist in it’s literal definition, is someone who is against another race of creatures. All humans fall under one race. The term came about when Africans were seen as lesser than human – a different race of creatures.

    The correct term, is technically ethnocentrism, which looks at it from a different perspective. While racist means someone who hates other races of creatures, ethnocentrism is holding an ethnicity (usually one’s own) above all the others.

    The semantics are not really important, I know, but they’re still interesting.