Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Because she’s being a good Democrat who can’t resist in engaging in some identity politics while telling her story.
In the Democrat Identity Politics Totem Pole™ hierarchy, she gets extra points for some of what she said, and therefore her perspective will carry more weight, so to speak.
+1 for being a woman [because this is marginally better than being a guy, because privilege]
+2 for being homosexual [because this represents an “oppressed” or “marginalized” group]
+3 for identifying as a hyphenated American [because Democrats tend to think most other countries are better than America, and folks who identify with anything outside of America bring a more valuable perspective]
+1 as her description of herself as Mexican may mean that she is a person of color [better than being white for sure, and maybe she’s “Latinx” LOL]
-1 for being a police officer [this is bad, as Democrats hate the police]
= MUCH MORE IMPORTANT PERSPECTIVE than a regular straight, “cisgender” white woman.
Well, now, isn't that strange ... I didn't see where the woman divulged membership in any political party.
Where did you land after jumping to that conclusion? Hope you didn't hurt yourself on the long way down.
Post #43 answered that question.
She offered up her "bonafides" of orientation, race and gender as some sort of proof that she's a "good guy" or to throw shade at the store with a backhand that they also kicked out a lesbian poc etc. etc. etc.
You have to be pretty invested in identity politics to offer that up.
Would be interesting now that you know what to look for you may start noticing how weird it is.
P.S. There are a number of good videos on youtube that show the same thing, just search on virtue signalling.
Because Republicans don't immediately offer up their sexual orientation and ancestry when explaining how they feel about something.
Is that a law or a rule somewhere?
Quote:
Alison Esposito, the New York Republican party’s lieutenant governor candidate of choice, opened up in a new interview about being its first openly gay candidate, steadfastly saying, “It can happen.”
Not the same thing at all. Esposito made the remark "It can happen" (referring to her being gay) during a discussion about her sexual orientation. Therefore, her comment was totally on topic... as opposed to someone who when asked what flavor of ice cream she prefers answers "Being female and gay and of African descent, I like strawberry flavor ice cream."
Not the same thing at all. Esposito made the remark "It can happen" (referring to her being gay) during a discussion about her sexual orientation. Therefore, her comment was totally on topic...
Because she’s being a good Democrat who can’t resist in engaging in some identity politics while telling her story.
In the Democrat Identity Politics Totem Pole™ hierarchy, she gets extra points for some of what she said, and therefore her perspective will carry more weight, so to speak.
+1 for being a woman [because this is marginally better than being a guy, because privilege]
+2 for being homosexual [because this represents an “oppressed” or “marginalized” group]
+3 for identifying as a hyphenated American [because Democrats tend to think most other countries are better than America, and folks who identify with anything outside of America bring a more valuable perspective]
+1 as her description of herself as Mexican may mean that she is a person of color [better than being white for sure, and maybe she’s “Latinx” LOL]
-1 for being a police officer [this is bad, as Democrats hate the police]
= MUCH MORE IMPORTANT PERSPECTIVE than a regular straight, “cisgender” white woman.
Because she’s being a good Democrat who can’t resist in engaging in some identity politics while telling her story.
In the Democrat Identity Politics Totem Pole™ hierarchy, she gets extra points for some of what she said, and therefore her perspective will carry more weight, so to speak.
+1 for being a woman [because this is marginally better than being a guy, because privilege]
+2 for being homosexual [because this represents an “oppressed” or “marginalized” group]
+3 for identifying as a hyphenated American [because Democrats tend to think most other countries are better than America, and folks who identify with anything outside of America bring a more valuable perspective]
+1 as her description of herself as Mexican may mean that she is a person of color [better than being white for sure, and maybe she’s “Latinx” LOL]
-1 for being a police officer [this is bad, as Democrats hate the police]
= MUCH MORE IMPORTANT PERSPECTIVE than a regular straight, “cisgender” white woman.
How is this post any less disrespectful towards the cop than the treatment she received from the store owner?
It's like you're fine with her getting crapped on, just for different reasons.
Kinda weird.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
