This isn’t a condemnation of anyone by race or gender, but a condemnation of how the narrative of identity politics is used to manipulate the emotions of the unduly passionate to achieve outrage when they’re supposed to, and yawns when they’re not. Because this, in another world, would rightfully evoke outrage.

“F—ing Hispanics! Go back to your country!” the [person] seethed as she attacked the 54-year-old victim on a Manhattan-bound No. 2 train at about 4:15 a.m. Tuesday, cops said. “You come here to take our jobs!” she railed.

The person was female. The person was black. The person was, it’s alleged, drunk and very, very angry.

Soon, the angry woman began antagonizing them, which lasted for a good 10 minutes, the victim said. When the victim’s co-worker tried to intervene, the attacker allegedly screeched, “You’re gonna defend this f——g b—-h?”

It has all the makings of a story of toxic masculinity and white supremacy, but for some minor details, that the person who spoke these words was neither male nor white. Perhaps President Obama’s absolute confidence is misplaced?

Before long, the woman snatched the victim’s hard hat from her bag.

“She was hitting me in the face and head,” the victim said. “Shouting racist things. I’ve never had a problem with anyone — black, white — but this woman, she was drunk or on drugs. I don’t know.

We are regularly regaled with stories of misogyny and racism based on utterances, some of which are facially offensive while others require a progressive flex to discern the hidden message of offense carefully buried beneath layers of seemingly banal words. Yet, the most observant see them and bang them to death.

Here? We have a local story in a city tabloid that has caught so little interest that it would likely be shocking if you heard of it. It’s not that what happened is any more or less of a big deal than, say, JK Rowlings’ twit, horrifying per Vox, as well as others. Yet Rowlings’ twit has gone round the world a few times while this story has barely gotten off the subway.

Nor does this phenomenon exist only when the participants are working folks, as reflected in the offensive conduct of judge. No, not Kozinski, but two justices of the peace in Las Vegas.

A two-day hearing to determine whether the actions of Las Vegas Justices of the Peace Amy Chelini and Melanie Tobiasson warrant suspension without pay turned into an indictment of the Judicial Discipline Commission, the panel passing judgment on the women.  

Chelini and Tobiasson are alleged to have engaged in “a pattern of abusive, intimidating, condescending behavior and created a hostile work environment,” according to prosecuting officers for the Judicial Discipline Commission.  

The judges are alleged to have used profanity behind the scenes at the courthouse, but not on the bench. 

Cussing judges? Is that even possible? But that’s not all they’re accused of.

Former Justice Court administrator [Kim] Kampling testified she was offended when she encountered Tobiasson in a courthouse parking lot wearing a t-shirt that said “Eat Shit and Die.”  

“I didn’t think anybody would wear something like that,” Kampling testified, adding she pretended not to care and told Tobiasson the shirt was cute.  “I wanted to take a picture of it. If I said ‘that’s so offensive,’ she wouldn’t let me take a picture of it.”

Was the shirt “cute” or offensive? There is no outpouring of outrage because nobody outside of the courthouse seems to know or care much either way. And if that’s not enough, there’s the filthy language.

Kampling testified that Chelini would greet her on the telephone by saying “What’s up, motherf—ker,” an allegation Chelini denied, while at the same time noting a member of Congress invoked the F word while advocating the impeachment of Donald Trump.

Noting this isn’t to say that it’s worthy of national, if not international, outrage and denigration. Indeed, it may well be that this conduct is unbecoming of a judge and deserves to be censured. But had this been conduct plus an identity that fit the narratives, these would be held up as outrages worthy of a million op-eds, demands for something to be done and a video series in the New York Times.

Instead, they’re stories no one knows nor cares about because they fail to reflect the identitarian side of the equation. If it doesn’t prove misogyny and racism, then it’s not important enough for you to know. And if it shows that impropriety doesn’t align with critical theory of oppression, then it’s best kept under wraps, as it could confuse those with absolute certainty that accountability only matters some of the time.

The problem isn’t bad judges or bad people on the subway, but maintaining the fiction of the narrative so we can easily discern the good people from the bad by looking at their socially constructed appearances.