I think it does matter who is classifying whom and why. What is frustrating about the way these opinions read, from Brown v. Board to the other cases we’ve read prior on classification and equal protection, is that there’s this underlying assertion that addressing race or sex or sexuality creates an immediate uneven playing field. These opinions (the excerpts we’ve read) include such a surface level account of history in a way that minimizes and often just completely ignores that harm that’s been done and the generations of time that would have to pass WITH actions in equity that could classify as “reparative”. The idea that classifying race or sex (insert protected class here) in an action meant to promote equity is discriminatory is laughable to me. If discriminatory “describes actions or practices that show unfair, prejudicial treatment of people or groups based on characteristics like race, gender, age, religion, or sexual orientation. It implies unequal treatment due to biases against particular classes or categories of people”, then perhaps the operative word to be focusing on is “unfair”. Frankly, there have been such evils enacted from the beginning of the nation’s founding to the present day that we continue to witness and suffer the reverberations of those policies and laws, and I am not convinced that actions taken in pursuit of equity is in some way replicative of that same evil. I think it’s an excuse to maintain subordination and the existing caste system.
I think it does matter who is classifying whom and why. What is frustrating about the way these opinions read, from Brown v. Board to the other cases we’ve read prior on classification and equal protection, is that there’s this underlying assertion that addressing race or sex or sexuality creates an immediate uneven playing field. These opinions (the excerpts we’ve read) include such a surface level account of history in a way that minimizes and often just completely ignores that harm that’s been done and the generations of time that would have to pass WITH actions in equity that could classify as “reparative”. The idea that classifying race or sex (insert protected class here) in an action meant to promote equity is discriminatory is laughable to me. If discriminatory “describes actions or practices that show unfair, prejudicial treatment of people or groups based on characteristics like race, gender, age, religion, or sexual orientation. It implies unequal treatment due to biases against particular classes or categories of people”, then perhaps the operative word to be focusing on is “unfair”. Frankly, there have been such evils enacted from the beginning of the nation’s founding to the present day that we continue to witness and suffer the reverberations of those policies and laws, and I am not convinced that actions taken in pursuit of equity is in some way replicative of that same evil. I think it’s an excuse to maintain subordination and the existing caste system.