[rpgdemon]

Originally Posted by Aerozord

cause I'm lazy and wasn't going to write out their race, nationality, and religion, considering it is, by your own admit ions, a very minor point in what I was saying. Its why I only used four letters, and you have it backwards. I am not saying all WASPs are the same, I'm saying all the founding fathers were WASPs, because its true. Just as its true they lived during the 18th century. I still feel its inclusion was justified as it contrasts the immense amount of religious and cultural diversity that we have today that, as I said in my last post, was something they had no familiarity with.

You are reading subtext that simply isn't there

edit: unless you are suggesting that they were not white aglo-saxon protestants, which to my knowledge, they all were. Thus what I said is wholly accurate

No, what I mean is, why's it matter? Like, if they were black gay women, would you go, "What do 1800s black gay women know about anything?" There's no reason that you'd mention it as a factor in their decision making abilities, if you didn't think that it was a factor in their decision making abilities. Regardless, I was mainly against the term in general as opposed to the specific case, because WASP is just used to label a sweepingly broad group as being a certain way, based on skin color and culture, which is the same as any other racist language. The only difference is that it's white protestants that it's labeling, which is okay, apparently?

Edit: I mean, if you can think of a good reason for the term that -isn't- just to sweepingly label people, I'm open to hearing it. But it seems like you'd want to rail against it the same way that you'd rail against people saying, "The ghetto rap music", and such.