Well the article you linked in your response showcases an author who links affluence and racial bias numerous times in the article and seems to be making the mistaken assumption that the audience simply agrees and does not require proof of this latent racial prejudice.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but a person who already believes that there is racial bias and in reading an article with no racially oriented vocabulary uses affluence cues as evidence of racial bias without showing how it isn’t a non-sequitor is showcasing classic confirmation bias. She seems like the kind of person who sees any tangential piece of information as proof of her prejudice, as confirmation of her beliefs and preheld views and notions.

But I suppose in a sense it is in the eye of the beholder if you already believe that there is racial bias underlying every preference and statement in the same way that oxygen is pervasive in the air we breathe, then you probably wouldn’t see any confirmation bias or any bias whatsoever.

But that’s the issue, isn’t it? If that’s how you see the world then nothing can, in your mind, disprove that notion any more than someone could disprove that you inhale oxygen.

That’s why I’m taking the time to point out that what she ascribes to race could instead be attributable to class. Not an unreasonable statement surely, but hopefully one that causes readers to question the tacit presumption of racism.