Yes and no. Defining racism as simply an offense against a person for their race or cultural heritage is a quick and dirty definition that works most of the time. But it also doesn't acknowledge the sociatal power/privaledge aspect that factors into why harming a group that functions as a societal "out group" is so harmful, and hence why we point out and call out an action as racist in the first place. And how an "outgroup' doing something similar (short of murder or direct assault, OBVIOUSLY) doesn't really have the same power behind it or ability to harm. (Think, white directors choosing only white actors for racist reasons. But conversely, directors of color filling their cast with mostly people of color to tell a story based around a specific groups story. Doesn't have the same weight).

My example, often shorted to the Power+Prejudice model, is EXTREMELY broke and misses alot of the import factors of systemic racism that we now better understand in critical race theory, but it at least gives more space to shine light on the points I above mention. Which is often times neglected under the more general "racism is just abusing people based on their race" model.

The quotes convo also is missing a whole other chunk of rant in which I further define what "white people" are. Specifically leaning into the way society (at least US society) often defines "white people" as simply "not people of color" and doesn't take into account or entirely ignores unique cultural aspects of say, a specific European group or even subgroup within a culture (like french Canadians, or Appalachian folk). This broad, amorphous definition further makes it functionally impossible to be "racist towards white people," because it then defines anytjing against, not even in offense, but even in baseline opposition to the anamorphosis blop of "white culture" as "reverse racist" against it?

This can also possibly explain why many people who self define as "white," but otherwise no other cultural background, often struggle to understand why their "criticism" of people of color can be racist? Because their stance as "white" is simply "not color," and thus they perceive anyone being "not white" and not yielding or assimilating to their standard, even criticizing an aspect of their standard, as an offense against them. Hence a fundimental failure to understand that dynamic, and assertioning that fair criticisms against them are "reverse racism," and their own racist gestures and actions as being just "criticism." Etc.

Bruh, you like, okay?

You came to a tongue in cheek journal about a person doing a "bad take" rant, dropped a shitpost response like it's Twitter, then seem... Annoyed? that the person who the journal is about, who gave permission for the journal to exist in the first place, popped in and went:

"Hey. Since you're actually engaging with the content as intended, let me further explain the sociological/critical race theory background behind the original shit take rant, cause it's actually kind of complicated and isn't explained, just implied, in the meme this original shit take rant originated from."

Like. I get if you weren't prepared to engage in like, "psuedo scholarly discussion " on the "furry fap website." But looking at someone trying to boil down a topic that normally requires, LITERAL BOOKS and/or a highschool quarter, to get explain, down to a handful of paragraphs; and then going "this subject requires more than just, a bumper sticker catchphrase, to explain. Obvi wrong and from a irrational, angry place," is kind of a shit take.

You feel?

What I see significantly wrong is that you seemed to either not read any of what he typed, or don't understand the complexity of the problem here. Sure, it can be simplified to "don't be mean to people based on race", but like most things, there's a lot more to it. That's like saying computers are just a bunch of parts put together. Not quite wrong, but still ignoring all the complexities that go into making a functional computer.

How dare you...

Not correcting the Grammer and spelling errors from autocorrect! And you left the the format the same as telegram! Now it's all jumbled and reads badly! And you didn't even add the later parts about defining "white people," and how the amorphous definition most often employed further facilitates power imbalances and prevents the same damage to one group as can be inflicted on the other.

Very sloppy sir.