Aunt Jemima and a Friday Examen
This week’s news tidbit:
This is happening in response to arguments which have been made before, but which have gained enormous traction and force with the combination of the resurgent Civil Rights movement in the past few weeks, combined with the advent of social media that have awakened a lot of Americans from their torpor about the casual racism that still suffuses a lot of American culture:
There have been moments like this in the past in US history, which is why you now eat at Denny’s and not at Sambo’s.
There are other corporate logos with similar images that are under fire (so don’t expect this house slave to be around much longer either):
And, of course, whenever this happens, you can reliably count on a lot of people to sigh with disgust and say, “Great. More meaningless PC crap from liberals.”
So lemme ask you something. If you think this is meaningless cosmetic PC tedium, ask yourself why something so “meaningless” bothers and angers you so much. After all, if it’s really meaningless to you but is obviously very meaningful to the people offended and hurt by it, why do you care if it is taken down? Brands change their logos constantly and typically nobody cares or even notices, except for people in the ad industry:
So if the Aunt Jemima change disgusts you, realize that is precisely why it is not meaningless. After you realize that, realize that the word you are actually looking for to describe this action is not meaningless but threatening.
Now ask why you feel threatened, who you think is threatening you, and why you feel threatened?
Also, pay attention to your reaction if it is “I don’t feel threatened, but I resent being lumped in with racists!” This is the “I insist on wearing the shoe I insist does not fit me” reaction. After all, I never said you declared it a meaningless PC gesture. I said if you are disgusted by it as a meaningless PC gesture, then you actually feel threatened. You chose to apply that condition to yourself. I don’t even know you.
Now the iron law in such cases is that the person who urgently insists on wearing the shoe they insist does not fit them is struggling with a guilty conscience. It is another form of the “I feel threatened” reaction. If you are doing that right now, note it and ask why you feel threatened, who you think is threatening you and why you feel threatened. These are all questions worth interrogating, particularly if you are a Catholic preparing to go to confession.
If you don’t feel threatened and genuinely celebrate this as a step forward, carry on. This post is not addressed to you and you already know that.
Oh, and if you resent those who do, in fact, celebrate this as a step forward and feel an ungovernable need to accuse them of “virtue-signaling” ask why you feel threatened by people celebrating a good thing, who you think is threatening you, and why you feel threatened. Compare and contrast your reaction to such people as opposed to your reaction to people who are glad that, say, a boy got a puppy for his birthday, or a little girl was celebrated for selling lemonade for charity, or some people survived a flood, or an old man was honored for his service in World War II. Nobody accuses people who are happy about such things of “virtue-signaling”. They simply recognize that normal people are happy when something good happens and like to say so. If you resent people who are happy about getting rid of an offensive corporate logo that is insulting to millions of people, ask yourself why you feel threatened, who is threatening you, and why you feel threatened.