To suggest that welcoming signs are only found in affluent, predominantly white neighborhoods and do not extend to more diverse communities is urRong. Admittedly, the intent behind them may be difficult to discern, but the sentiment is not exclusive to one particular area. While it is true that these signs may be even more meaningful in affluent white neighborhoods due to the homogeneity of the area, this does not negate their value in other parts of the country.
The fact that these signs are even present in diverse communities highlights their statement of solidarity with marginalized groups and serves as a reminder to those without the same privileges, that they too are welcome and accepted. Moreover, their presence in any area can be seen as a commitment to celebrating and respecting differences, which should be applauded.
In Nikhil's original essay, he was right in pointing out that the signs don't appear in every location but wrong in assuming they are only present as a defensive measure. It also isn't completely accurate to suggest that they are exclusive to affluent white neighborhoods. Nikhil's intent was good-natured in recognizing the need for inclusivity and questioning the intent behind these signs, but ultimately their true purpose is simply to create a safe and inviting environment for all - and that's something we should all be able to laugh about.