We sometimes become so obsessed with punishing villainous characters, that we forget the collateral damage is actually experienced by marginalized groups, and we shouldn't punish them for that.

If we write our laws and design them around the most privileged members of society, i.e., billionaire football team owner, then we forget about the people who don't have the same resources to make an appeal, to fight a wrongful accusation. Those tend to be members of the LGBT community and people of color because those are the people who tend to engage in the work of reappropriation to subvert discrimination. And yet those are the same ones being denied, based on their own identities.

Laws shouldn't just be about the quality. They should also be about equity and if they're placing a social burden on marginalized groups, then those laws need to be reconsidered.

The term Christian used to be a pejorative. Back in the day, Christians were persecuted; however, over time, it became one of the word's biggest religions. Same thing with the term Mormons in the religious area. Mormons didn't want to be called that. They wanted to be called Latter-day Saints. It's only been in recent decades that they kind of shifted that position and took ownership of it.

I don't support hate speech. I don't want to support a racist football team or bands that are offensive.

I started asking friends, my white friends around, I said, "What's something that you think all Asians have in common?" They almost always immediately said, "Slanted eyes." I thought that's really interesting. No. 1, it simply isn't true. Not all Asian Americans have slanted eyes, and of course, Asians aren't the only ethnic identities to have them. No. 2, we could talk about our slant on life and what it's like to be people of color, while at the same time, using this outdated and obscure racial slur, and turning it on its head.

Your uniqueness is your greatest strength, not how well you emulate others.