There wasn't a need to be hostile Johnny C, but it is kind of anal/irrelevant insisting that "Speciesism" be used instead of "racism" in District 9, when the "alien species" is clearly a metaphor for a particular "race."
The point is, you can use the two terms interchangeably in discussion of D9 and we'd still get your point. It doesn't matter.
PS: variable_star, I don't see how "compulsory alien servitude" in the movies the io9 article listed doesn't illustrate a human oppressor/alien innocent relationship to you. I think by being overly critical, you're missing out on watching some really worthwhile sci-fi. If you're looking for a rehash of D9, I don't have any further suggestions for you. Just because a downtrodden species decides to rebel (in a violent fashion) against its captors doesn't necessarily change the fact that they were originally persecuted or exploited. To compare this concept to a recent film (say, Inglourious Basterds), did the actions of the Basterds or Shosanna in retaliating against the Nazis somehow undermine the fact that millions of Jews suffered? I don't think so.
If you ask me, alien-human relationships (hypothetically speaking) would never be so black-and-white. Even in D9, the aliens aren't completely blameless (for example, the scene at the end when a group of Prawns rips a MNU soldier apart), though there are definite situations where humans are reprehensible (such as when Wikus is forced to shoot a captured Prawn in the science lab). Yes, the aliens were cruelly treated, yes, it was the fault of the humans, but the Prawns are not harmless creatures, either. IMO, a movie dealing with a human oppressor/alien innocent relationship wouldn't be as interesting if the aliens were fragile, defenseless creatures incapable of fighting back.