176 Comments

Maybe there is a slim justification for it, but I still think it's stupid. Why hand a hunk of red meat to that segment of the political spectrum that is whining it is whites who are the "real victims" of discrimination?

Expand full comment

Because cancelling a decade-long tradition in order to avoid upsetting racists is EXACTLY how those racists want it to work.

Expand full comment

Why are the white people automatically the racists? I think excluding anyone based on race is wrong.

Expand full comment

This is a bad faith argument, right? Because I refuse to believe you're reading and commenting in good faith at Wonkette without at least some peripheral knowledge of systemic racism and implicit bias.

Expand full comment
Dec 19, 2023·edited Dec 19, 2023

How bad faith? Rather, I think that to call exclusion bad and wrong in one sense and make all kinds of excuses for it another sense, is the epitome of bad faith.

If the intent is to celebrate the achievements of people of color, fine. I am sure the white council members would have gladly celebrated this along with them. I maintain that excluding people---particularly at this time of year--was flatfooted, stupid and ugly. And I don't care if it went on for a decade or for five decades.

Boston is a city that is 48% white. The Mayor is supposed to be the mayor of all the people.

Expand full comment

The mayor is hosting several parties for several different groups. I'm gonna keep pasting the same quote until y'all get the point. "Affinity groups allow members of a underrepresented group to connect and not feel like the outsider for once."

Expand full comment

Eh, I'm with Baker here: It isn't a big thing/problem, but it is an inherently wrong thing. About one-twentieth as serious as farting during a meeting without apologizing. Doesn't mean it can't be useful or have good results.

It's just that the foundational concept is inherently re-inforcing the idea that people should be judged based on their skin colour. It can probably be solved with proper framing: If it were a "winners of the fight against institutional racism" selection, then you would still get to get exactly the same people but you would be grouping them based on an achievement and not their skin colour.

Expand full comment

Just for fun, I did an image search for "republican dinner party". Oddly, I couldn't find people of color in any of those photos, except for a few who seemed to be staff. Shocking, I know.

Expand full comment

"Affinity groups allow members of a underrepresented group to connect and not feel like the outsider for once."

Very, very well stated, I'll quote this in the future!

Expand full comment

Frank Baker seems to have a few burner accounts, judging by some of the comments here.

Expand full comment

Fuck off (I don't mean it, I'm just expressing annoyance, I don't actually want you to leave), people get to have opinions that do not match yours.

Basing a group on skin colour is an inherently bad idea. At the very least reframe it as something they achieved, like getting elected as a minority, don't just say "you're not white", say "you succeeded despite not being white".

Expand full comment

"Affinity groups allow members of a underrepresented group to connect and not feel like the outsider for once."

Expand full comment

Yes, that is one of benefits that can happen when you do something bad. Reality is a messy thing, bad things can have good consequences in addition to the bad consequences. But those benefits are small scale and short term, while the race-ifying of the conversation is a longer term problem of large scale. FYI you can create affinity groups without making it purely defined by race.

Anyway, to repeat an important point for the n-th time: It is not a big thing. It is a bad thing, but only mildly bad. So if it also has good consequences, then meh. Who cares. It's the weak groups temporarily abusing power they rarely hold, and it is collective, so there is no risk of it becoming the same issue inverted. It is a non-issue.

That doesn't mean I appreciate being called a sock-puppet for having an opinion.

Expand full comment

Edited: I appear to have read into your intentions, judging by the content of your other comments in this thread. I apologize for jumping to conclusions and wish you well, comrade.

Expand full comment

Funny, I think it does just the opposite. After all, what is it except another form of segregation.

Expand full comment

Oh fuck off, I'm so over this shitty argument. White people are not being segregated. We're the fucking majority, and have been excluding minorities for literally all of American history (and all the rest of "Western" history as well.)

Expand full comment

So you just made my case for me. Yes, white people did a terrible thing by segregating and excluding others. So what are you saying---you are endorsing reverse discrimination as some sort of payback? Also, FFS in this day and age why pretend that "color," as it was so crudely worded, is the only basis for discrimination that people have fought and surmounted? Off the top of my head I can think of several other forms of discrimination that people have overcome that had nothing to do with color: LGBTQ+. Fat people. Old people. Physically challenged people. Muslims. Jewish people (until recently Harvard had a quota for Jewish students; ironically they now have one for Asian students). So celebrating victory over discrimination is not exclusive to color.

I agree that this went under the radar for several years and what brought it to harsh light was that second "disinviting" email. Without that, this whole brouhaha probably wouldn't have developed. But I still think the disinviting was stupid and wrong.

Expand full comment

You really think we've "overcome" queer discrimination? I can tell you first-, second-, and third-hand that's utter bullshit. However, that's a conversation for another time and I'm already sick of your awful opinions.

I'm not advocating for reverse discrimination. That's a right wing dogwhistle and I'm calling bullshit. Equity is not reverse discrimination. It's making up for the sins of the past. Good day.

Expand full comment

I second this. I still think this is a bad thing, but 'diversity power' won't lead to a mirror of 'white power' because it is diverse. That makes it inherently resistant to becoming a pattern of power abuse. At most it is going to be mild power abuse, but that's not a pattern, which is an important distinction.

Expand full comment

Bite me (I don't mean it, I'm just expressing annoyance, I don't actually want you to bite me, see how insincere that sounds when someone says it to you), while people get to have opinions that do not match mine, I get to find those opinions wrong and express that in a snarky way.

The entire point of the holiday party, of which there are like 20, is that they succeeded as people of color in state politics (ie, not being white). Personally I think that after the invitation went out it was poor form to rescind it, at least from an etiquette standpoint. In this case, however, the group isn't based on skin color but shared experience as members of different, historically marginalized groups. Also, I'm assuming based on your spelling of "colour" that you are not a US American, so maybe don't lecture US Americans of color on what their experience means?

Expand full comment

/gives a friendly bite.

If that's the point then that's the point that should have been posted in this story. The way the story is written the group isn't about their success in the specific context, it is about having a colour. So I am going to assume you're right here, and in that specific context I don't have a problem with this mild form of discrimination.

Edit to add: Wait, you're the one saying I must be an alt account. Why the fuck did you call me a sock puppet, fuckstick? You don't get to school people on being nice when you start out calling everyone who has an opinion you disagree with a sock puppet.

Expand full comment

That photo feeds steroid to the white replacement theory bugaboo.

Expand full comment

I am so tired of white men complaining when things aren’t exclusively catered to them. How dare anything exist that isn’t centered on them?! Ugh.

Expand full comment

Your comment is not really relevant, the only critique comes from Baker who says it isn't a big thing. That's not complaining, that's pointing out mild disagreement.

Expand full comment

It’s just not white! Erm… right!

Expand full comment

The Mayor qualified her earlier statement: 'How much fucking store brand potato salad do you fucking think I can eat? Fucking whitey might have taken all the spices in the world, but he sure didn't use them'

Expand full comment

Yeah, because parties and club memberships and elected positions and seats on the board and membership in the literary canon and and and.... has never been Whites Only.

Expand full comment

Didn't Mother teach you, two wrongs don't make a right?

Expand full comment
Dec 18, 2023Liked by Stephen Robinson

I have to admit that when the story first broke, I thought the party was a little too much. But the story (on the Daily Show, of all places) left out the detail that the party had been around for 10 years. They made it sound like the only holiday party the Mayor was throwing or attending was 'no whites allowed.' Reading this post changes my opinion a little. Maybe the retraction email could have announced another party for everybody?

Expand full comment

Eh, just let it be. Yes, it isn't 100% proper, but it is mostly harmless.

Expand full comment
Dec 18, 2023Liked by Stephen Robinson

FFS, white people mad because somewhere someone's having a party happening that's not about them -- and to which they wouldn't be invited anyway -- need something to do.

I say "not about them" because that's what they actually have a problem with. It's not like they think white spouses/family of POC elected officials are being turned away at the door on account of being white.

Expand full comment

Who is mad? I just see a quote by Baker who is leaving it alone and just expressing mild disagreement. Are you refering to something else you read or saw on the subject?

Expand full comment
Dec 18, 2023Liked by Stephen Robinson

As a white woman, I just wanna say that the idea of a whites only event is always disturbing. When white people gather on account of their whiteness, some bad shit is going to be planned or happen. Just nope.

Expand full comment

Three whites is a brunch. Four or more is a lynching.

Expand full comment
Dec 18, 2023·edited Dec 18, 2023

I live in a suburb outside of Boston, and the amount of racist and sexist vitriol posted about Mayor Wu should be shocking to me, but it (sadly) is not. An article about some random thing that might not have even happened in Boston or something that happened related to the MBTA is almost always followed up with some version of "racist WuWu is too busy hating whites to care about (some random car accident in NOT Boston)". It's appalling.

Expand full comment

“You don’t want me at a party, I’m not going to come to a party.” OK. We don't want you at a party.

Expand full comment

𝘍𝘰𝘹 𝘕𝘦𝘸𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘶𝘭𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘤 𝘎𝘳𝘦𝘨 𝘎𝘶𝘵𝘧𝘪𝘦𝘭𝘥...

Stop right there. Gutfeld is not, and never has been, anything close to a comic. He has fewer skills in that line than your uncle clowning for the family at Thanksgiving dinner. He has no conception of what humor is, no comic timing, no idea of how to do a comic facial expression, no ability to read an audience -- none of the basic skills you need before you can call yourself a comic.

Expand full comment

So you're saying the bigger joke is him calling himself a comic?

Expand full comment

Yeah. He can be enjoyed, sort of, on some kind of meta level, as a guy whose miserable attempts at humor fail so spectacularly that they become, in themselves, a source of humor.

Expand full comment

IOW, Andy Kaufman

Expand full comment

Come on, its Boston. Would you want a bunch of drunken Irishmen at your party? I wouldn't, its bad enough I have to spend Thanksgiving and Christmas with the bastards, I'd like to go to one classy affair! Erin go bragh!

Expand full comment

I'm Irish and from the Boston-area my whole life. I've been to many St Patrick's Day parades in South Boston (at one time, solely 100% Irish). It was known for it's drunken rowdiness. The parades are run by a group of (primarily older) whites from South Boston who were subsequently sued by others for being non-inclusive. Those who sued for non-inclusiveness won in Court.

That being said, I don't like to see ANY group, male, female, trans, gay, straight, white, black, asian etc to be told only this one particular group can or cannot attend. It's paid for by everyone's taxpayer dollars. IF you're going to have a party, either EVERYONE gets invited or NOBODY gets invited. Just like the parade!

Expand full comment

You are aware this isn't the only christmas party held by the city government, right? Or did you skip the article and come right to the comments to be wrong?

"Affinity groups allow members of a underrepresented group to connect and not feel like the outsider for once." - Don't worry, white people will have plenty of taxpayer funded parties to feel like the insiders.

Expand full comment

Identity politics is a loser.

Expand full comment

The only side doing "identity politics" is the right. And then they're projecting. The left is just trying to give every group a little equity to make up for the massive underrepresentation they've experienced for our entire national history.

Expand full comment

Yes, I read the article. She isn't having only one holiday party, she's having multiple parties.

In my opinion, white people have had nearly all the past parties with few invites for others. I'm here. I'm very aware of history. I know what she said. I simply questioned whether there should be separate parties at all. Why not have multiple inclusive parties for all? I realize they may not have room for all parties in one location, have multiple parties in multiple locations and invite multiple groups for all parties. It doesn't need to be segregated. It doesn't need to be ranked or tiered. Include members of ALL groups in every one of them.

Expand full comment

I'll just paste the same quote again, since you don't seem to be getting the point: "Affinity groups allow members of a underrepresented group to connect and not feel like the outsider for once."

Expand full comment

Segregation is NEVER the solution.

Expand full comment