this is worth reading, as a case study. i've perceived a lot of similar things, and heard a lot of push back, but this is one of the more clear examples i've seen somebody articulate. the intentions may have been just (if scientifically unsound), and it's not abused by everybody that talks in these terms, but when you hear the language of critical race theory coming from white people, it's often being used as a way to mask racist beliefs and racist actions. it's a type of crypto-racism, or socially acceptable racism, put through this hyper-orwellian filter.

well, read the article.

my comments...

"Too often, the IFs assume the inferiority of those who are PoC/female/gay etc which is in itself racist/sexist and homophobic. More so, by making assumptions prior to knowing someone, they ignore the complexities of humans and human relationships."

this is the crux of my issue. she's describing something she's experienced, but it's not really fair to assign those characteristics to other people with the same views. there's no logic there. this, on the other hand, is a good point, and a scary one.

more concerning to me is that it seems as though it often functions as a mask for actual racism. all of a sudden, it's ok to argue for racial purity or for segregation (albeit using different jargon) - from the left. sometimes, i think this follows from a level of naivete or a level of emotional repression. but i've met people who i think are actually deeply racist and just hide behind the language to justify that racism.

if people are curious, the internet is saturated with essays like this by supposedly "unprivileged" people. the unpeople. i've read quite a few. the commonality is a feeling that the boundaries being placed around them are artificial, and a sort of desire to push back against it.

http://melissa-fix.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/privileged-problems.html