npub1kpwlxpzkxfmuxjmzc2wp3rf9vjg0sgydmlhsnrgqr3maf59h86qqdxxzz4 (npub1kpw…xzz4) npub1rc5mgu0zxxydcpafuesqtz0x6mmhwya4rsmq47lsfa5qsyu6ajeq2qtchp (npub1rc5…tchp)
If you want a theoretical discussion about law philosophy, then maybe you are right.
But this has little connection to reality. And in this case, the intention of proving in a theoretical-philosophical discussion derails from the racist intentions behind these laws. Therefore, why would you want to prove that?
Think this analogy: Now we talk about a law in the US that allows police to shoot immediately when they feel threatened.
Following the theoretical-philosphical logic, this law wouldn't be racist. Because in an "ideal" world heavily armed cops would shoot only the bad guys, right and have no racist bias. But we all know that POCs have a much higher chance to get shot.
again: the lawmakers usually know what they are doing (ok, not always, as there are accidents).
Furthermore, I could imagine that the issue might also have to do with the fact that hairstyle is for some groups more important than others. For white folks, hairstyles can be used to show rebellion (long haired hippies in the 60-70s, punks in th 80-90s).
But then there is this thing of cultural expression and identity that seems a little bit more important for some black folks, wouldn't you agree?
So, when laws about hairstyles are made, you repress both rebellious youth (that chose to have long hair or punk hairstyles to show their disagreement with societal standars, but otherwise could pass as sons and daughters in law) and people from historically oppressed groups that can't hide that see every day they are not part of the dominant (white) society and have their own issues finding their identity. And for some of them, hairstyle is more than just a fashion choice.
Earthworm /
npub1xm…de5ut
2023-09-23 18:35:00
in reply to nevent1q…78c6
Author Public Key
npub1xm6eexa94xd7x79lugtcunfcews2z934aheut6ns3scg4s8ukw2sade5utPublished at
2023-09-23 18:35:00Event JSON
{
"id": "f8c79f023a6d380e7e52fb6f3075aa8daa0b5ae2c596490fba4eb9588d41ed50",
"pubkey": "36f59c9ba5a99be378bfe2178e4d38cba0a11635edf3c5ea708c308ac0fcb395",
"created_at": 1695494100,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"p",
"b05df304563277c34b62c29c188d256490f8208ddfef098d001c77d4d0b73e80",
"wss://relay.mostr.pub"
],
[
"p",
"1e29b471e23188dc07a9e6600589e6d6f77713b51c360afbf04f6808139aecb2",
"wss://relay.mostr.pub"
],
[
"p",
"12da98a3a66fb47b43526b1b241e91df632bfd4058dc5364938dc932fe931118",
"wss://relay.mostr.pub"
],
[
"p",
"d30eb16aca68e3f04b1df4926db9d4dcaa575902517d0753d4e3448f8d7e7b0c",
"wss://relay.mostr.pub"
],
[
"e",
"0204174c5536344e60116a44be0ac4aaae0a91bea4ebebe3e2e154957cf6de5c",
"wss://relay.mostr.pub",
"reply"
],
[
"proxy",
"https://kolektiva.social/users/earthworm/statuses/111115901349109447",
"activitypub"
]
],
"content": "nostr:npub1kpwlxpzkxfmuxjmzc2wp3rf9vjg0sgydmlhsnrgqr3maf59h86qqdxxzz4 nostr:npub1rc5mgu0zxxydcpafuesqtz0x6mmhwya4rsmq47lsfa5qsyu6ajeq2qtchp \n\nIf you want a theoretical discussion about law philosophy, then maybe you are right. \nBut this has little connection to reality. And in this case, the intention of proving in a theoretical-philosophical discussion derails from the racist intentions behind these laws. Therefore, why would you want to prove that?\n\nThink this analogy: Now we talk about a law in the US that allows police to shoot immediately when they feel threatened.\nFollowing the theoretical-philosphical logic, this law wouldn't be racist. Because in an \"ideal\" world heavily armed cops would shoot only the bad guys, right and have no racist bias. But we all know that POCs have a much higher chance to get shot.\n\nagain: the lawmakers usually know what they are doing (ok, not always, as there are accidents).\n\nFurthermore, I could imagine that the issue might also have to do with the fact that hairstyle is for some groups more important than others. For white folks, hairstyles can be used to show rebellion (long haired hippies in the 60-70s, punks in th 80-90s).\nBut then there is this thing of cultural expression and identity that seems a little bit more important for some black folks, wouldn't you agree?\n\nSo, when laws about hairstyles are made, you repress both rebellious youth (that chose to have long hair or punk hairstyles to show their disagreement with societal standars, but otherwise could pass as sons and daughters in law) and people from historically oppressed groups that can't hide that see every day they are not part of the dominant (white) society and have their own issues finding their identity. And for some of them, hairstyle is more than just a fashion choice.",
"sig": "15859abfc2592c35ef5c2167c013def0dab55217ca95b14939d0c464c761a280dd428cbb7baf0af5b154ef10e66e5ae3b0d181267fe5d71df619e8e6695a3f18"
}