Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
You know what I want? I don't want to read stuff like this... Not because I don't want it to happen but because it should be so normal that nobody cares!
I agree, but since it does matter let’s keep these stories coming until it doesn’t!
There's a substantial school of philosophy that holds that continuously celebrating the first time someone from group X does thing Y tends to degrade public opinion of X, rather than supporting it.
The reasoning is that if the public mostly hears about group X in terms of the first time they did something that someone else has done, it entrenches the idea that group X is behind whoever did it first.
It essentially claims that celebrating firsts is initially good for group X but becomes negative over time. They would point out that the promise of "paving the way" rarely pans out. We saw the first woman elected as prime minister in 1960. People born then could be grandparents today and it's still relatively rare to see women as the head of state.
From that perspective such articles would better support various groups if they focused on the accomplishments of the subjects rather than their identity. We don't generally celebrate Ada Lovelace as the first female programmer; we celebrate her as the first programmer.
Note that I'm also making an assumption in terms of goals. The above only makes sense if you believe that it's more important for an article to convince non-believers than to reassure believers.
That's actually a convincing angle, as someone who grew up with blue collar rust belt types. I think what matters more than "the first" is just representation as a whole. It doesn't matter to me if we celebrate the first gay character on TV, for instance, so long as we have lots of gay characters on TV. So making sure this information is carried to black and trans women especially, but maybe she doesn't need to be national news for Fox News fodder, yeah. I can see that.
I'm with ya. And, during any other administration and environment this should be a non-issue and not worthy of column inches. I do like that we have to reach this far to get a new 'first' achievement, for instance, showing that yesteryear's achievement is this year's baseline. It shows we've come a short way and we could keep going.
But in this admin, it's worthwhile to (constantly) restate the position wins and achievements of some people; not because they're special, but because the bigots claims these achievers are less-than and unworthy of common decency.
And I'm completely okay with thumbing our nose in their bigot faces, every damned time.