What I want to know is why when Scientists and Academics hold discussions that break into the nuances of whatever it is they’re studying, whatever theories and practices they have, it’s called “Peer Review” and disagreements, debates, facts, and rhetoric are generally seen as contributing
— but when marginalized/oppressed people do the same things it’s just “armchair activism” and only “talking”.
(Source: turdlewexler)
28 Oct 2012 / Reblogged from bad-dominicana with 167 notes