Threads

Why racialized emoji were a unicode design mistake

5 tweets · March 2021 · 50 likes · 1 retweets · read on Twitter

Watched this at 1.75x speed. Was kinda helpful. I'm pissed at Apple for violating the unicode guidelines & making white emoji. Also pissed at whoever thought the solution was to add other races rather than acknowledge that the categories of unicode are not the place for that.

jennifer daniel @jenniferdaniel ·

This was presentation really hard to write but what I love about doing talks is that they force me to zoom out of my tiny world and see how we're in the middle of the development of emoji, not at the beginning, not at the end. youtube.com/watch?v=kaucJc…

I also think making yellow peoply people was a mistake emoji-wise. As soon as they have hair, you've lost it. Ok: 🤠 Not ok: 👮 Yellow hands should have been kept to go with the yellow smiley color which I'm pretty sure was chosen because yellow is considered a happy color.

Comparisons with the simpsons only arise when you start having peoply people, at which point yep, yellow is white, because there are a few racialized characters on that show who are literally racialized by having their color *accurate* instead of *yellow*.

As a long-haired man who loves all colors but purple especially, I default to this emoji 🤦‍♀️ instead of 🤦‍♂️ or 🤦, but I shouldn't have to pick a hair length and shirt color in order to facepalm! That's irrelevant to the meaning of the gesture.

Malcolm Ocean 🏴‍☠️ @Malcolm_Ocean ·

PSA: I almost always use the woman emoji on here 🤷‍♀️ because she's likes purple and has long hair, like me. We need to talk about underrepresentation of long-haired men in iconography. 🙅‍♀️ ...I'm not actually wanting to open that convo up in its usual form 🤦‍♀️ This tweet = parody.

Relevant thread about how using categories to validate is a losing battle. Your experience is valid regardless of how well it fits in any categories. That's not what categories are for.

Malcolm Ocean 🏴‍☠️ @Malcolm_Ocean ·

I saw a tweetstorm (that I'm not going to QT because it would read as dumping on them & undermining their point) that was naming a dozen subtly different sexual identities and saying each is valid. I actually want to amplify the part of their point that's: "your exp is valid!"