> Does this mean giving up on attempting to prosecute police officers who murder citizens?

I'm not sure how your response there follows at all from the GP's comment of "You can support people of color without actively denigrating straight white men", and indeed I feel like this is a clear example of what I'm thinking about.

It follows because "supporting people of color" is an empty statement if it isn't backed by policies, some of which are quite different from the status quo.

The truth is you can't support people of color without having straight white men feel denigrated. Because as soon as you support people of color the straight white men show up with tiki torches shouting about how they won't be replaced. Equality is not acceptable for these people.

Or you could just support people instead.

Not "Black Lives Matter" but "stop Police Violence". Not "Believe All Women" but "Believe Victims". Not "Affirmative action for non-white non-Asians" but "Affirmative action for the poor" (hint: every discrimination is positive for someone and negative for someone else).

I'm a straight white man (of a certain age) and support for people of colour doesn't make me feel denigrated... Two points we are not all the same... and really we aren't a we at all!

I mean so am I. Obviously I'm talking about the ones that feel denigrated, which is enough to get Trump elected.

> All US presidents have been straight white guys

Obama is not white

.. I can't believe I made that mistake, and the first reply didn't notice.

Sometimes simplifying 98% to "all" is valid.

Joe Biden won the primary because he was the least divisive. White men have no "cards" to play. They can't play the LGBT card, the race card or the gender card - so they by default have the biggest tent. Until we stop with identity politics it will always be this way.

If you hang out in LGBT and general non-conforming circles, you will realize that the white male position is the societal default, and it is nowhere near neutral - it is assumed to be only by those who have never realized that there are other possible default positions.

Some white men are beginning to see that their bubble is breaking.

What is the 'white male position'?

If this argument was moved to, say, Nigeria, would there be a problematic 'black male position' there?

Expectations about what constitutes being qualified for leadership positions. The automatic deferring to old men as authority figures over other people (trans people have direct experience). The way most many carry out competition. The idea of stoic sternness as being the ideal. Tone and voice.

Trans people who express themselves as male have a ton of interesting anecdotes about how they were suddenly seen as more competent just for being men.

Is this exclusive to white society?

If anything the whole macho leadership thing is even more apparent in less developed places.

Yes absolutely. Mugabe of Zimbabwe is well known for illegitimately taking land from white farmers and forcefully redistributing it, and has been repeatedly called out for this. We shouldn't be surprised that when a President has more to do with Mugabe than Reagan that he will be called out on it.

Biggest tent that contains only straight white guys? Are you suer that's the biggest possible tent rather than one which contains everyone?

I don't think that's a "debating in good faith" interpretation of the parent comment, which was clearly talking about moving beyond identity politics. That is, if you demand on identity politics, the "identity" that is going to be the biggest is the US for the near future is straight white people. If you really do want the biggest possible tent, as you suggest, we'll likely need to move beyond identity politics.