Are You SORRY You're WHITE?

[Sexy Celebrity]

Australian nurses must acknowledge their white privilege to patients. (https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/australian-nursing-and-midwifery-code-of-conduct-slammed-over-white-privilege/news-story/4d1d71f45af35b8ffdd25fd40804d5a3)

Do you ACKNOWLEGE your WHITE PRIVILEGE, whitey?

Are you SORRY for being WHITE?

Should white people be sorry and acknowledge their white privilege to those who are not white?

Discuss amongst your white selves.

[jiraffejustin]

Being white is like having AIDs now, I guess.

[gandalf26]

The forum very soon...….

https://regmedia.co.uk/2013/08/17/nuclear_explosion.jpg?x=1200&y=794

[Captain Steel]

This classic social experiment by the late great Eddie Murphy should answer all your questions...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_LeJfn_qW0

P.S. Eddie is still alive and is still great, it's only his career that is "late"

[Miss Vicky]

But only half of me is white. Does that mean I should half-ass my discussion?

[rauldc14]

Fight the power! Fight the power! Fight the power that be!

[Captain Steel]

Most of the time I'm sorry for being ...
period.

[Swan]

Being white is like having AIDs now, I guess.

You're just a white man, of course you'd say that.

;)

[Gatsby]

Yo, SC, why do you just assume that everyone's white? :D

[Sexy Celebrity]

Yo, SC, why do you just assume that everyone's white? :D

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=46963&stc=1&d=1534296123

That's a white guy.

(and I like his glasses)

[HashtagBrownies]

46964

[Sexy Celebrity]

This thread is in serious need of Aretha Franklin and George Michael.

I would prescribe this for every thread with an ailment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBCWLhlJV0Y

[HashtagBrownies]

I mean, how can I be sorry for something I have no control over?

[Swan]

I mean, how can I be sorry for something I have no control over?

Because Evil White Patriarchy... or something. I think it's a monstrous alien blob of goo that eats everyone except white dudes.

[Sexy Celebrity]

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=46965&stc=1&d=1534296889

Nothing showed WHITE DOMINANCE like the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man in Ghostbusters. Tell me that's not a secret KKK scene.

[Swan]

The KKK can try to hide themselves by turning their pointedness into giant fat roundness all they want, but they're fooling no one.

[iank]

Um, no. I'd love to actually encounter someone in real life trying to pull this kind of crap, just for the look on their face when I put my foot up their ass.

[Swan]

Gatsby marked no. That is great, because he is the whitest person here. :)

[cricket]

I'm not sorry for shlt!

[Iroquois]

Um, no. I'd love to actually encounter someone in real life trying to pull this kind of crap, just for the look on their face when I put my foot up their ass.

Responses like this are why I voted yes.

[Yoda]

Responses like this are why I voted yes.
Not really sure how that makes sense. Unless you were using the poll as a proxy for broader issues and not answering literally.

[jiraffejustin]

Responses like this are why I voted yes.

Make sure you address your white privilege before you respond to him/her, please.

[Iroquois]

Not really sure how that makes sense. Unless you were using the poll as a proxy for broader issues and not answering literally.

I can do both. I'm sorry that being white means I share something in common with the kind of person who gets this upset over having to acknowledge the concept of white privilege.

Make sure you address your white privilege before you respond to him/her, please.

*them

[jiraffejustin]

*them

Well that's presumptuous. He/she might only identify as one person.

[Iroquois]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they

[jiraffejustin]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Them!_(1954_film)

[Yoda]

I can do both. I'm sorry that being white means I share something in common with the kind of person who gets this upset over having to acknowledge the concept of white privilege.
Do you literally think people are responsible for the actions of other people of their race, and should express remorse for them, or were you just looking for a way to push back on that sentiment in a way that seemed like it related to the poll question?

I'm also not sure where you're getting the idea that they were upset over "having to acknowledge the concept of white privilege." The question was about being "sorry" for being white.

Seems to me this is another proxy fight, where people say things they don't mean because they understand it to be a signal for a broader disagreement. So "I'm not sorry for being white" is treated as a stand-in for rejecting the entire concept of privilege, and "I am sorry for being white" is just a way to acknowledge it exists.

I think very little is served by having these discussions through so many obvious layers of abstraction--either in terms of simply speaking truth, or persuading others.

[Iroquois]

Now I'm just sorry I posted in this thread.

[Yoda]

Um, no. I'd love to actually encounter someone in real life trying to pull this kind of crap, just for the look on their face when I put my foot up their ass.
If they did, I'll put my money on you totally not doing that. Because it'd be, ya' know, crazy, and wildly disproportionate to the offense.

It's always kinda funny when people use the Internet to imply others are only talking tough because they're on the Internet.

[Yoda]

Now I'm just sorry I posted in this thread.
Why? You got your dig in. You expressed the obligatory pithy disdain. You can now disregard my attempt to draw a discussion from it until it comes up again, as is our inexplicable tradition.

[Iroquois]

Very well...

Do you literally think people are responsible for the actions of other people of their race, and should express remorse for them, or were you just looking for a way to push back on that sentiment in a way that seemed like it related to the poll question?

More the former than the latter. It doesn't seem like it's asking too much to acknowledge that (even if "sorry" is not the most accurate choice of words to reflect the situation as you can only take so much - if any - personal responsibility for the misdeeds of others), hence why it's questionable when someone disagrees so strongly with the question.

I'm also not sure where you're getting the idea that they were upset over "having to acknowledge the concept of white privilege." The question was about being "sorry" for being white.

I got it from the part about threatening physical violence against anyone who tried to pose this same question at them in real life - also, the idea that one has to first acknowledge a problem before they can truly be sorry for it so it just makes me question how many of the "not sorry" people still acknowledge the concept or not.

Seems to me this is another proxy fight, where people say things they don't mean because they understand it to be a signal for a broader disagreement. So "I'm not sorry for being white" is treated as a stand-in for rejecting the entire concept of privilege, and "I am sorry for being white" is just a way to acknowledge it exists.

You're right, it was wrong of me to assume that Sexy Celebrity of all people with his trademark oversize coloured words and use of the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man was posing this question with a particular degree of sincerity. It's bad semantics all over this thread.

I think very little is served by having these discussions through so many obvious layers of abstraction--either in terms of simply speaking truth, or persuading others.

Tell me about it. At least this one looks like it'll be short.

[Iroquois]

Why? You got your dig in. You expressed the obligatory pithy disdain. You can now disregard my attempt to draw a discussion from it until it comes up again, as is our inexplicable tradition.

https://i.gifer.com/EbEc.gif

[Slappydavis]

Since I'm guessing no one looked up the nurse's code in question, here's some context on that link at the start of the topic.

Here's a link to the code, http://www.nursingmidwiferyboard.gov.au/Codes-Guidelines-Statements/Professional-standards.aspx

Here are the two applicable portions as far as I can discern, the first is in the glossary and it's the singular spot where "white privilege" appears:

Cultural safety concept was developed in a First Nations’ context and is the preferred term for nursing and midwifery. Cultural safety is endorsed by the Congress of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Nurses and Midwives (CATSINaM), who emphasise that cultural safety is as important to quality care as clinical safety. However, the “presence or absence of cultural safety is determined by the recipient of care; it is not defined by the caregiver” (CATSINaM, 2014, p. 9 ). Cultural safety is a philosophy of practice that is about how a health professional does something, not [just] what they do. It is about how people are treated in society, not about their diversity as such, so its focus is on systemic and structural issues and on the social determinants of health. Cultural safety represents a key philosophical shift from providing care regardless of difference, to care that takes account of peoples’ unique needs. It requires nurses and midwives to undertake an ongoing process of self-reflection and cultural self-awareness, and an acknowledgement of how a nurse’s/midwife’s personal culture impacts on care. In relation to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health, cultural safety provides a de-colonising model of practice based on dialogue, communication, power sharing and negotiation, and the acknowledgment of white privilege. These actions are a means to challenge racism at personal and institutional levels, and to establish trust in healthcare encounters (CATSINaM, 2017b, p. 11 ). In focusing on clinical interactions, particularly power inequity between patient and health professional, cultural safety calls for a genuine partnership where power is shared between the individuals and cultural groups involved in healthcare. Cultural safety is also relevant to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health professionals. Non-Indigenous nurses and midwives must address how they create a culturally safe work environment that is free of racism for their Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander colleagues (CATSINaM, 2017a ).

Maybe you hate the idea of acknowledging white privilege, if you think the concept even exists, but 1) This is not asking the nurses to apologize for being white 2) there is no requirement for nurses to declare their white privilege [when looking around this stuff a lot of people were buying into this fabrication].

Second is the code around Culturally Safe Practice:

3.2 Culturally safe and respectful practice
Culturally safe and respectful practice requires having knowledge of how a nurse’s own culture, values, attitudes, assumptions and beliefs influence their interactions with people and families, the community and colleagues. To ensure culturally safe and respectful practice, nurses must:
a. understand that only the person and/or their family can determine whether or not care is culturally safe and respectful
b. respect diverse cultures, beliefs, gender identities, sexualities and experiences of people, including among team members
c. acknowledge the social, economic, cultural, historic and behavioural factors influencing health, both at the individual, community and population levels
d. adopt practices that respect diversity, avoid bias, discrimination and racism, and challenge belief based upon assumption (for example, based on gender, disability, race, ethnicity, religion, sexuality, age or political beliefs)
e. support an inclusive environment for the safety and security of the individual person and their family and/or significant others, and
f. create a positive, culturally safe work environment through role modelling, and supporting the rights, dignity and safety of others, including people and colleagues.


Additionally, there's a fact sheet that also touches on the changes and why they were made including:

What is ‘cultural safety’ and why is it a requirement in the codes?

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples experience poorer health outcomes than non-Indigenous peoples.

Cultural safety is a proven way for nurses and midwives to contribute to better health outcomes and experiences for Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander peoples.

Cultural safety is about acknowledging the social, historical and structural factors that can have an impact on the health of Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander peoples. Rather than saying ‘I provide the same care to everyone regardless of difference,’ cultural safety means providing care that takes into account Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander peoples’ needs.

Many nurses and midwives will already be practising cultural safety, even if they have not heard of the term. The new codes of conduct guide all nurses and midwives on a cultural safety.



By the way, this seems to have been created in response to a Medical Journal of Australia study (https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2016/205/8/improving-maternity-services-indigenous-women-australia-moving-policy-practice)in 2016, in particular under the section "Priority 2: Culturally competent maternity care", and here is the general justification (I edited for length, but by all means read it all):

Maternity systems have failed to incorporate the evidence provided by Indigenous women on the impact of social risks that include cultural risk...Recent empirical work in Australia reconfirms that these risks are still valid, highlighting that they not only cause distress to women and families, but also increase clinical and medical risks...

We acknowledge the importance of clinical and medical risk, but suggest that the definition of risk needs be broader, to incorporate the social (cultural, emotional and spiritual) risks as valid and important dimensions of risk assessment requiring risk management processes. The disconnection between social, cultural and spiritual risk and western clinical and medical biophysical risk is a critical and understudied phenomenon that needs further work.

What they are calling culturally competent care is a standard best practice across US medical associations as well. But they didn't use the term white privilege so it wasn't grabbed on to by external groups for their pet issue. And honestly, that may have been the mistake that the writers of the nurses code made, because now there's this huge distraction that's setting back a well-established good principle of accounting for people's culture when treating them. So I do wish they hadn't used the term, because clearly their hearts are in the right place and it's politicized a concept that should remain within the medical practice.

[d_chatterley]

Do you ACKNOWLEGE your WHITE PRIVILEGE, whitey?

Absolutely.

Are you SORRY for being WHITE?
Absolutely not.

Should white people be sorry and acknowledge their white privilege to those who are not white?

Acknowledging white privilege is vastly different from feeling sorry about being white and putting those two different things in one question is implying you cannot have one without the other. This is what turns most white people off from discussing or acknowledging white privilege because a lot of them feel that somehow when they acknowledge it, they have to feel guilty about it.

[Slappydavis]

I was writing up a post that was going to answer the direct topic question, but d_chat beat me to it and probably did a better job.

You owe it to yourself to acknowledge unearned benefits in your life, if only for the sake of calibrating which forces were responsible for the shape of your life.

If someone says you need to do it in a public shame sort of way, yeah, I'd probably be against that. But when people encourage you to do it out of self-reflection, I think it's completely healthy.

That said, I still answered Yes out of the pettiest instinct because the poll was made in bad faith.

[d_chatterley]

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=46965&stc=1&d=1534296889

Nothing showed WHITE DOMINANCE like the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man in Ghostbusters. Tell me that's not a secret KKK scene.

Dang! Newt Gingrich sure looks different today! Or is it Chris Christie? I can't tell. Don't have my glasses on. :)

[d_chatterley]

This thread is in serious need of Aretha Franklin and George Michael.

I would prescribe this for every thread with an ailment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBCWLhlJV0Y

Let's say a prayer for Aretha. I read she is very ill in the news.

[jiraffejustin]

That said, I still answered Yes out of the pettiest instinct because the poll was made in bad faith.

By the same token, most conversations about white privilege aren't in good faith.

Sure, white privilege exists. But privilege of all kinds exists, and the benefits of just being white are incredibly slim. I live in rural Oklahoma, and I can tell you, white privilege hasn't done sh*t for all these white people out here.

[Camo]

I'm sorry i ever joined this site, that's for sure.

[jiraffejustin]

I'm sorry i ever joined this site, that's for sure.

Why?

[MijaFrost]

Why should anyone be sorry for being white, or anything else? That's just racist, and eff racists. Period.

[Guaporense]

Being white is like having AIDs now, I guess.

It's like being part of aristocracy back in the 18th century.


Anyway, the fault of the existence of white privilege lies with those that are prejudiced and so in their prejudice they unjustly benefits whites. That's assuming that such thing exists (which I think it does in certain countries: if you have a name like Tyrone it's more likely your CV will be. rejected by a company than if your name is Sam in the US).



Hence, if you are identified as white and is privileged from it is the fault of those who are privileging you through their prejudice and not our fault if they are being prejudiced against/for you.


Prejudice is the fault of those that are doing the discrimination and not the fault of those receiving it (either positively or negatively).

[cat_sidhe]

https://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-i-m-not-black-but-there-s-a-whole-lot-of-times-i-wish-i-could-say-i-m-not-white-frank-zappa-86-16-29.jpg

[gandalf26]

The UN should just declare a huge war on the filth that is the white race and remove this blight from the universe forever!

[mattiasflgrtll6]

I mean, how can I be sorry for something I have no control over?

This exactly. What the hell is the point of going around feeling "guilty" for being born with a certain skin color? If others commit atrocities and happen to have the same skin color, that's not the fault of my own. We can just do our best being good people to one another. I don't look at myself as a white person. I look at myself as a person.

[matt72582]

Out of ALL the characteristics available to describe myself, skin pigment is the LAST one.. Would YOU want to be compared to all the people whose arms you can match in a tanning bed?

"Hi I'm Matt, and I'm off-white, what color do you identify with?"


I rather be defined by my actions, and then... movie/comedy/music tastes. "Hi, I'm Matt and my favorite directors are" is the way I introduce myself.

[MovieGal]

https://pics.me.me/this-is-me-waiting-for-th-privileges-of-being-white-11720460.png

[Yoda]

More the former than the latter. It doesn't seem like it's asking too much to acknowledge that (even if "sorry" is not the most accurate choice of words to reflect the situation as you can only take so much - if any - personal responsibility for the misdeeds of others), hence why it's questionable when someone disagrees so strongly with the question.
I think saying sorry is "not the most accurate choice of words" is a significant understatement and pretty much the entire explanation here. That posture is fundamentally wrong, for reasons d_chatterly explained.

Even if someone is skeptical of the concept of privilege, there's clearly an extra edge to the response when they're told they should be apologetic for their race, because that's clearly accusatory and overtly personal. So I don't see any good reason to assume that the hostility you might see in response to this question would transfer right over to any modestly related question about race or privilege.

I got it from the part about threatening physical violence against anyone who tried to pose this same question at them in real life. also, the idea that one has to first acknowledge a problem before they can truly be sorry for it so it just makes me question how many of the "not sorry" people still acknowledge the concept or not.
That's true, but I'm still not really seeing the supposed connection between "this person really hates the idea that they should apologize for their race" and "this person categorically rejects any concept of different races having a harder or easier time in life." I'll grant there's probably a more-than-random amount of overlap there, but it's a pretty big assumption because the two ideas are not actually that similar, in type or degree, even though they often get lumped together. It's kinda like assuming people who don't believe in affirmative action don't believe in racism.

You're right, it was wrong of me to assume that Sexy Celebrity of all people with his trademark oversize coloured words and use of the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man was posing this question with a particular degree of sincerity. It's bad semantics all over this thread.
I'm starting to think a lot of the exasperation (or outright despair) over these discussions is exaggerated by the fact that almost nobody is speaking directly to the concerns of anyone else. Everything's four layers removed, so it shouldn't be shocking if it never seems to get anywhere.

[Cobpyth]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CmzT4OV-w0

[Slappydavis]

By the same token, most conversations about white privilege aren't in good faith.I'm not sure that's true. I'm a fairly liberal dude, the majority of my friends are liberal, I'm guessing I gravitate towards liberal groups, and I can't recall having ever seen an example of a bad faith white privilege conversation that wasn't brought to my attention by a PC outrage group of one type or another.


I'm definitely not saying that bad faith white privilege conversations don't exist, sometimes the ones brought to my attention are indeed pretty ridiculous, but I'm not sure it's the majority. And from the accounts of the PC outrage centers, I should be encountering this all of the time.


Oh, I guess I was making an assumption, I was assuming you meant most conversations started by what you would call Pro-PC person on white privilege were started in bad faith, not ALL conversations (including Anti-PC) on white privilege.


I also want to put a finer point on why I consider this topic to be in bad faith (I'll also acknowledge here that it's SC, and I think it was done for getting a rise and not actual malicious intent). The poll primes in two ways, it puts the person on the defensive AND it tries to frame the conversation in a way that is specifically misleading.



I want all people to acknowledge privilege in your life, I want all people to reflect on privilege's role (good or bad) in their life, they can do whatever they want to after they reflect. If they feel like saying sorry, fine, if they don't, that's fine too.



To be honest, I wouldn't have gone to college if people didn't assume I was going to (I did poorly in highschool, they had no reason to think I'd do well) and I loved college and actually did pretty well and landed into a good spot in life. Is that all white privilege? Probably not. Is it all middle class privilege? Probably not. But I sure didn't earn all of it, and I'm very grateful for that push. And I want to extend that opportunity to more people.



I live in rural Oklahoma, and I can tell you, white privilege hasn't done sh*t for all these white people out here.
I definitely agree that the rural poor deserve so much more care than they get, regardless of race. That reminds me of a Brother Ali track that actually hits on a lot of topics floating around here including that one:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u97-70tjXAg

[ash_is_the_gal]

Absolutely.


Absolutely not.



Acknowledging white privilege is vastly different from feeling sorry about being white and putting those two different things in one question is implying you cannot have one without the other. This is what turns most white people off from discussing or acknowledging white privilege because a lot of them feel that somehow when they acknowledge it, they have to feel guilty about it.
there it is.

[MovieGal]

Really? That’s you? I could have sworn that was one of your victims!

I think it's all b/s...I don't give a hoot what color/gender/race you are...even freaking alien from another planet...if you are good at what you do..thats fine with me!

[Citizen Rules]

'White privilege' as applied to today's world is a politically incorrect phrase. All anyone has to do is to read the verbose, indignant replies on this thread, to see that the term 'white privilege' to white people is akin to racial slurs to minorities. It's deeply offensive...As it's racism to blame an entire race for past privileges by some members of that same race.

Once there was white privilege decades ago, today it's used as excuse to explain why many minorities remain poor and disadvantaged. The advantage today in America for college applications and jobs goes to minorities and women as a result of institutionalized affirmation action programs.

The correct phrase to use today is 'Economic Privilege', people born to families of wealth (regardless of their skin color) have a higher chance of going to college and of landing great jobs and buying a house and having the means to live financially secure. Meanwhile those born to improvised families have a hard time bettering their own lives. That holds true regardless of skin color.

A poor white person like myself couldn't afford to go to college, so I'm in the working poor category. Not middle class, I'm the working poor... Let me tell you all, the term 'white privilege' as it applies today in America is a hateful term...and if we don't start embracing the idea that we are all one people on one big planet, then we're doomed to hate each other based on skin pigments.

[ash_is_the_gal]

'White privilege' as applied to today's world is a politically incorrect phrase. All anyone has to do is to read the verbose, indignant replies on this thread, to see that the term 'white privilege' to white people is akin to racial slurs to minorities.ew, no it's not. the backlash white people are currently experiencing is NOT on the same scale, spectrum, universe as ACTUAL LASHES BLACK PEOPLE WERE GIVEN TO THEIR NAKED SKIN FROM RACIST WHITE PEOPLE WHO BOUGHT THEM AFTER THEY WERE TORN FROM THEIR MOTHER COUNTRY

so just stop it.

[Camo]

+5 Rep!

[Yoda]

I'm not sure slavery is the appropriate comparison, since the concept of white privilege is based on how some people are advantaged now over other races now.

Obviously, that's going to be the indirect result of that history on some level, but that's the thing we're comparing, not mixing-and-matching time periods so we're dismissing rust belt unemployment rates because nobody's getting whipped.

[ash_is_the_gal]

I'm not sure slavery is the appropriate comparison, since the concept of white privilege is based on how some people are advantaged now over other races nowya it is. he compared their [white people's] hurt feelings upon being told they have privilege akin to minorities hurt feelings when they hear racial slurs. which is ridiculous. why is the word n*gger so bad? because it's what slaves were called by white people when they weren't seen or treated as actual human beings. so, ya, it is a fair comparison, and what he said was... less good than what i said. i stand by that.

[Yoda]

Hmm, might have been a misunderstanding, then, because it was phrased like this:

"...the backlash white people are currently experiencing is NOT on the same scale, spectrum, universe as ACTUAL LASHES..."

At face value this is a comparison between this "backlash" and slavery itself, as opposed to saying the history of slavery renders some racial slurs more potent. If the latter is what you meant, yeah, that's certainly reasonable.

[ash_is_the_gal]

At face value this is a comparison between this "backlash" and slavery itself, as opposed to saying the history of slavery renders some racial slurs more potent. If the latter is what you meant, yeah, that's certainly reasonable.
yeah, cause that's the kind of horror history that racial slurs remind minorities of. there is no such comparison in the phrase 'white privilege'; it doesn't conjur up any image or remind white people about how they were stolen and dehumanized and tortured and raped and whatever else. honestly if you're into pointing out incorrect comparisons i'm kinda wondering why you didn't say that to CR.

[Stirchley]

Is the OP having a slow newsweek? What’s his next thread gonna be about?

[pahaK]

ew, no it's not. the backlash white people are currently experiencing is NOT on the same scale, spectrum, universe as ACTUAL LASHES BLACK PEOPLE WERE GIVEN TO THEIR NAKED SKIN FROM RACIST WHITE PEOPLE WHO BOUGHT THEM AFTER THEY WERE TORN FROM THEIR MOTHER COUNTRY

so just stop it.

So millions of white people sold to slavery and torn from their mother countries don't matter? Or the fact that African slave trade was largely ran by Muslims? Why only black suffering matters and why only white crime matters?

[ash_is_the_gal]

So millions of white people sold to slavery and torn from their mother countries don't matter? Or the fact that African slave trade was largely ran by Muslims? Why only black suffering matters and why only white crime matters?

not sure how you got all that from what i said, but yeah, sure, we can go with that. :idea:

[Stirchley]

If it’s about our sex lives, please don’t.

[Sedai]

ew, no it's not. the backlash white people are currently experiencing is NOT on the same scale, spectrum, universe as ACTUAL LASHES BLACK PEOPLE WERE GIVEN TO THEIR NAKED SKIN FROM RACIST WHITE PEOPLE WHO BOUGHT THEM AFTER THEY WERE TORN FROM THEIR MOTHER COUNTRY

so just stop it.

Sadly, the slave trade was thriving in Africa for centuries before America even existed. When the Portuguese invented the caravel and finally were able to navigate around certain areas of the continent, Enrique Infante (Henry the Navigator) and Vasco De Gama discovered a massive slave trade already in existence. Exactly zero of the people involved in the slave trade at that time were white. The Portuguese immediately altered their previous search for gold and other riches, and loaded up their ships with slaves and returned home with their newly acquired acquisition.

"As the Portuguese explored the coastlines of Africa, they left behind a series of padrões, stone crosses enscribed with the Portuguese coat of arms marking their claims,[21] and built forts and trading posts. From these bases, the Portuguese engaged profitably in the slave and gold trades. Portugal enjoyed a virtual monopoly of the Atlantic slave trade for over a century, exporting around 800 slaves annually. Most were brought to the Portuguese capital Lisbon, where it is estimated black Africans came to constitute 10 per cent of the population." Source Here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portuguese_discoveries)

Not to mention the thriving Arab slave trade that had been going on for centuries. I just want to clarify that America certainly didn't create the slave trade, and neither did white people. History will show that they were certainly at the forefront of abolishing slavery, though. That had to start somewhere. I'd like to claim it started in America, but if I recall, it started in England.

[ashdoc]

I am a fair skinned person in a country ( India ) where many people are brown skinned . Admittedly my fair skin gives me an advantage of being upper caste ( upper caste people are more fair skinned ) and in my younger days girls used to consider me a goodlooking guy based on my fairer colour . No , I am not sorry for being fair skinned .

[Captain Steel]

I am a fair skinned person in a country ( India ) where many people are brown skinned . Admittedly my fair skin gives me an advantage of being upper caste ( upper caste people are more fair skinned ) and in my younger days girls used to consider me a goodlooking guy based on my fairer colour . No , I am not sorry for being fair skinned .

Hey ash, I wanted to ask you - do you know the whole origin of the "Aryan" thing? Because they say it stems out of India (strange place for something that eventually turned into a Caucasoid supremacist eugenics thing to begin) - something to do with lighter-skinned Indians in Asia? I've never understood it.

[ashdoc]

Hey ash, I wanted to ask you - do you know the whole origin of the "Aryan" thing? Because they say it stems out of India (strange place for something that eventually turned into a Caucasoid supremacist eugenics thing to begin) - something to do with lighter-skinned Indians in Asia? I've never understood it.

the people who form upper castes in india probably came from southern russia/caucasius and migrated to india . they defeated and conquered a dark skinned people called dravidians . unlike africans who were primitive hunters/gatherers , the dark skinned dravidians of india were a evolved people with a civilization of their own . but did not have the military ferocity of the white skinned invaders .

later the white skinned people started calling themselves as aryans and adopted the swastika as the symbol of the religion they formed in india---hinduism . they intermarried into the dravidians and a mixed race called indo aryans was formed . but the upper castes to which i belong were dominated by the fair skinned aryans and they relegated the dark skinned dravidians to lower caste status . the lower castes had to clean excreta ( a task done by the mahar and mang castes ) and burn dead bodies ( done by the chandal caste ) .
the upper castes were priests and warriors .

[ashdoc]

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-88983a54d30866faba0f46f3e293de53-c

hindu swastika and nazi swastika .

[Captain Steel]

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-88983a54d30866faba0f46f3e293de53-c

hindu swastika and nazi swastika .

Fascinating stuff.
Thanks, ash!

I recently viewed a YouTube video about what the swastika means in Japan...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qV7xbAVOY0

[Slappydavis]

'White privilege' as applied to today's world is a politically incorrect phrase. All anyone has to do is to read the verbose, indignant replies on this thread, to see that the term 'white privilege' to white people is akin to racial slurs to minorities. It's deeply offensive...As it's racism to blame an entire race for past privileges by some members of that same race.
Damn. Thinking white privilege is proportional to racial slurs is one of the best examples of white privilege I can think of.


I'm not saying that to be cute, it literally is.

[Yoda]

yeah, cause that's the kind of horror history that racial slurs remind minorities of. there is no such comparison in the phrase 'white privilege'; it doesn't conjur up any image or remind white people about how they were stolen and dehumanized and tortured and raped and whatever else. honestly if you're into pointing out incorrect comparisons i'm kinda wondering why you didn't say that to CR.
I said I thought your argument was reasonable, but that's not quite the same thing as saying the thing it was arguing against was "incorrect." It's probably missing important perspective and implying an equivalence in degree that isn't there, but "incorrect" means something false on a more basic level than that, at least to me.

I'd have to think more about how much (and in what way) I disagree with his original comparison, but I find it less obviously wrong than you, I suppose, for one simple reason: I don't think that it's better to be called a monster than to be the victim of one. Describing the horrors of slavery does a good job of explaining why being reminded that your ancestors were victimized by it could feel particularly horrific, but it doubles as an explanation as to why someone might be deeply upset by being similarly linked to the perpetrators.

[jiraffejustin]

A question for people who believe white privilege is real and significant: does black privilege exist? what about Latin privilege? Asian privilege? etc., or do only white people have privilege?

[Yoda]

Also, it'd be great if people could stop auditing whether I've replied to their "side" once more than the other side. Sometimes I have less to say about certain things even if I disagree with them. Sometimes my disagreement with something is more fundamental and easier to articulate than another. Sometimes I just get distracted by a work thing. Sometimes <whatever>. If you're assigning me some kind of quota and bristling if it's not even at a given moment in time, then I'm afraid we have very different ideas on how to approach arguments.

[ash_is_the_gal]

for one simple reason: I don't think that it's better to be called a monster than to be the victim of one. Describing the horrors of slavery does a good job of explaining why being reminded that your ancestors were victimized by it could feel particularly horrific, but it doubles as an explanation as to why someone might be deeply upset by being similarly linked to the perpetrators.

ugh, this is the problem. white people being told to acknowledge they have privilege act like they are being told they are monsters. that's why this whole 'feel bad, apologize for being white!" thing is dumb. and anyway, i didn't link his behavior to that of a slaveholder, i pointed out that using their ancestors petnames (the slur) for their captives doesn't compare to telling someone to realize their whiteness gives them certain advantages (white privilege).

[Slappydavis]

A question for people who believe white privilege is real and significant: does black privilege exist? what about Latin privilege? Asian privilege? etc., or do only white people have privilege?
Yup, it exists. You can point to all sorts of examples (I think a lot of us have watched The Act Of Killing).

Am I (or you) living in a place where it exists on the same scale? Empirically, emphatically, no.

Should those people that have the various privileges acknowledge them? Yes. Just the way that whites should.

Were you expecting something else?

[Citizen Rules]

Damn. Thinking white privilege is proportional to racial slurs is one of the best examples of white privilege I can think of.

I'm not saying that to be cute, it literally is. Being accused of white privilege because my skin is white, is deeply offensive to me. As is collectively blaming me for past sins caused by long dead white people. I didn't do anything wrong, I wasn't around in the slave days. I don't deserve to be labeled, (I don't mean you personally, I'm not saying you did, I mean labeled by society)

Can I ask you some personal questions? If not just ignore.

I assume you're young and from an affluent white family who was able to send you to college where you could earn a degree and set yourself on the path to financially security? I assume also you're a caring person who's aware of past racial injustices and you have empathy, and you think about all the advantages your family was able to give you and you feel guilty about those minorities who are living in abject poverty with little hope? Is that close to your personal truth?

If so I suggest you have 'white guilt' and you're not 'white privilege' but you are 'economically privilege'.

[ash_is_the_gal]

Also, it'd be great if people could stop auditing whether I've replied to their "side" once more than the other side. Sometimes I have less to say about certain things even if I disagree with them. Sometimes my disagreement with something is more fundamental and easier to articulate than another. Sometimes I just get distracted by a work thing. Sometimes <whatever>. If you're assigning me some kind of quota and bristling if it's not even at a given moment in time, then I'm afraid we have very different ideas on how to approach arguments.

ha, i've seen you tell people to do very similar. you are definitely concerned with making sure everyone is being as fair and unbiased as is possible, but of course, you're biased, too. we all are in fact. it's literally impossible for people not to show bias. so you should probably stop expecting it from others and you might not hear it from them as much. though, you're Top Mod, so probably not, but yeah... just the 2 cents from a random forum goer.

[jiraffejustin]

i pointed out that using their ancestors petnames (the slur) for their captives doesn't compare to telling someone to realize their whiteness gives them certain advantages (white privilege).

You're right. Using the term white privilege is far from using the n-word. That's a fair and considerable example of a white privilege. We don't have a term that can be used against us that is as powerful as that one.

[Yoda]

ugh, this is the problem. white people being told to acknowledge they have privilege act like they are being told they are monsters.
I think that makes more sense if someone believes that "white privilege" is actually more like what's described in the OP: being told you should be "sorry" for it. I certainly don't think that's inherent to the concept, and I don't think that's what you mean by it, either, but to some it has that connotation.

Also worth noting that even if someone isn't taking that tack, it's hard to avoid some version of guilt when you're essentially told you have an unfair advantage. The inevitable implication is that you didn't necessarily earn what you have, and that what you have should by rights maybe be someone else's. So while there are more or less militant/insulting conceptions of this idea, even the most thoughtful version is still partially an accusation.

[jiraffejustin]

Yup, it exists. You can point to all sorts of examples (I think a lot of us have watched The Act Of Killing).

Am I (or you) living in a place where it exists on the same scale? Empirically, emphatically, no.

Should those people that have the various privileges acknowledge them? Yes. Just the way that whites should.

Were you expecting something else?

No, in fact, I was hoping for this response.

[Yoda]

You're right. Using the term white privilege is far from using the n-word. That's a fair and considerable example of a white privilege. We don't have a term that can be used against us that is as powerful as that one.
I didn't click on Cob's video but I think that's probably the same bit where Louis CK says "I'm a white man, you can't even hurt my feelings," right? There's certainly something to that.

I'll just double down on the pop culture stuff and reference the South Park episode where Token's mad at Stan for trying to empathize with him for being black and then Stan has the epiphany that to "get it" he has to recognize that he'll never get it.

[Camo]

I think that makes more sense if someone believes that "white privilege" is actually more like what's described in the OP: being told you should be "sorry" for it.

Slappy pointed out here (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1936074#post1936074) that's not what this is. She isn't being asked to apologize for it only to acknowledge it and it's not even a requirement. Nobody looked into this they just went straight to outrage and denial.

[jiraffejustin]

I went straight for the joke, a couple jokes. I thought they were decent jokes. Not perfect jokes.

[TheUsualSuspect]

But I'm also ginger....so......

[jiraffejustin]

But I'm also ginger....so......

Are you really? I didn't want to come out alone, but since you are here too.... I am also a ginger.

[Captain Steel]

But I'm also ginger....so......

That's like having white privilege and being an abused minority at the same time! ;)

[Slappydavis]

I assume you're young and from an affluent white family who was able to send you to college where you could earn a degree and set yourself on the path to financially security? I assume also you're a caring person who's aware of past racial injustices and you have empathy, and you think about all the advantages your family was able to give you and you feel guilty about those minorities who are living in abject poverty with little hope? Is that close to your personal truth?

If so I suggest you have 'white guilt' and you're not 'white privilege' but you are 'economic privilege'.


In order:
Young? Probably, I'm almost 30 though so I'm confronting the grim visage of my own mortality. Which is to say that my body doesn't feel invincible and it sucks.


Affluent family? Eh. My dad is a preacher and my mom is a public school teacher (my mom makes more than my dad). I felt pretty middle class for whatever that's worth. Maybe I didn't have everything I wanted, but I never felt worried about getting basic needs met.

Parents paid for college? Actually, it was the reverse, I paid for myself (and took out loans) and let my parents keep me as a dependent for tax relief which meant I didn't get financial aid!

There's this odd tax deduction thing that exists for preachers that totally screwed me over on the FAFSA. They didn't pay for any of my college and that deduction made it so that I didn't qualify for any grants. I went to community college for a couple years (and found out I loved it) and that I could handle because community college is an AMAZING deal. I transferred for a 4 year and I let my parents keep me on as a tax deduction (which, honestly, was a financial miscalculation, turns out I would have been better off paying my parents that deduction and not being a dependent, unfortunately by the time I took econ courses on this I was off their dependency). When I turned 26 and was off my parent's tax dependency I qualified for LOTS of aid. I also won a few scholarships in economics that helped out a lot. I only took out loans on 2 years of state university, but it was quite a bit of money still and I'll be paying it off for a decade at least.

Of course, the costs of providing for me over my life were far more than what I lost out on during college. But to your question, no, they didn't contribute to my ability to go to college (and would not be able to without financial stress on their part, I'm not blaming them).

And I don't feel much "white guilt", because again, I anticipate doing my best to use the partially unearned position in society I have to extend the opportunity I have to others. Maybe I'd feel guilt if I didn't do that? Dunno.

But I definitely feel privileged. For being white, and for many other things.


To be totally honest, my family wasn't totally good or kind to me during my developing years. We're cool now, for the most part. The "family" privilege I feel is the completely incredible and nurturing group of friends I lucked my way into.

[Sedai]

Should those people that have the various privileges acknowledge them? Yes. Just the way that whites should.


Why? What will that achieve?

Secondly, why is it important to you that other people, some that you will never meet personally, acknowledge this?

Personally, whether or not I was to acknowledge this or not, I will still treat people the same way I always do, no matter their race, gender, etc.

If they are a jerk, I probably won't be nice to them. If they are not a jerk, I probably will.

[Yoda]

ha, i've seen you tell people to do very similar.
I think you've seen me call people out for arguing one thing over and over to avoid arguing another. I don't think you've seen me try to ding people for minute distinctions in how frequently they discuss things, though.

you are definitely concerned with making sure everyone is being as fair and unbiased as is possible
Wouldn't make a lot of sense to fight "bias" if it's just going to be defined as "wanting to talk about a given topic more than any other given topic," since that's universal. As you said, everyone is biased. I do try to push people to be more civil (and less glib) within their preferred topics, but I think that's a different thing.

but of course, you're biased, too. we all are in fact. it's literally impossible for people not to show bias. so you should probably stop expecting it from others and you might not hear it from them as much. though, you're Top Mod, so probably not, but yeah... just the 2 cents from a random forum goer.
I think the mod thing is what's really going on. I think there's an unstated expectation that I should have to be relatively "even" in heated threads even if my natural interest or inclination is to argue with one thing a little more than another (as it is for literally everyone).

Anyway, the implication is presumably that I have some underlying sympathy with the comparison, so I overlook it in order to nitpick someone I have less underlying sympathy for, right? Something like that? I think I have enough of a post history to prove that what I respond to is almost always a function of the type of disagreement I have with it. That I care a lot more about logical fallacies or invalid comparisons than I do about people just exaggerating, for example. That's how I ended up arguing with conservatives more than liberals for pretty much a year straight.

[Slappydavis]

Why? What will that achieve?

Secondly, why is it important to you that other people, some that you will never meet personally, acknowledge this?

Personally, whether or not I was to acknowledge this or not, I will still treat people the same way I always do, no matter their race, gender, etc.

If they are a jerk, I probably won't be nice to them. If they are not a jerk, I probably will.
I don't think I've been unclear on this, it's a part of healthy self-reflection. You should find out which parts of your life were shaped by particular forces, and I think that sort of privilege is a big part.


If you want a specific principle as an example, approaching Rawl's Veil of Ignorance (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veil_of_ignorance). I can expand on that if you'd like.

[Yoda]

Slappy pointed out here (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1936074#post1936074) that's not what this is. She isn't being asked to apologize for it only to acknowledge it and it's not even a requirement. Nobody looked into this they just went straight to outrage and denial.
Aye, I saw that post. Even repped it. But I haven't actually been talking about the nurse story at all. I took it merely as a jumping off point for the OP question: "Are you sorry you're white?" That's all I mean when I reference the OP.

[Slappydavis]

No, in fact, I was hoping for this response.
Good, and sorry for the pithy final sentence. Trying not to fatigued by this.


Killer Mike still rules.

[jiraffejustin]

Good, and sorry for the pithy final sentence. Trying not to fatigued by this.


Killer Mike still rules.

He does. I met him before a concert. He's a really nice fellow.

[jiraffejustin]

Slappydavis

How much do you think your whiteness added to your current position? Does your whiteness ever keep you from feeling proud of what you've accomplished or whatever it is that you are on track to accomplish? Do you think of being white as being akin to taking steroid? And by that, I mean that even if you take a steroids, you still have to work out for it to do anything for you. And I know that people choose to take steroids, but they don't choose to be white. That part of the metaphor is not what I'm referring to.

[Sedai]

I don't think I've been unclear on this, it's a part of healthy self-reflection. You should find out which parts of your life were shaped by particular forces, and I think that sort of privilege is a big part.


If you want a specific principle as an example, approaching Rawl's Veil of Ignorance (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veil_of_ignorance). I can expand on that if you'd like.

I read your claim earlier, so I get it. But what will that self-reflection achieve? I already treat people well. I treat them with respect and I try to get to know them for who they are, and the things they care about.

My life was shaped by my family and I being poor in the 70s and 80s. My single mother bought my clothes at a second hand store and we stood in line for Government cheese. I could self-reflect about that, and how it seemed unfair at the time, but instead I choose to look forward and make an effort to actively change my situation. I have made a lot of progress through a lot of hard work. I have also seen people of all stripes do both better and worse than me, usually due to the decisions they make in their lives.

You seem smart, and thought experiments are fun to think about, but I always find that reality tends to play out a little differently when I try to apply them to my life.

Personally, I dislike grouping people into groups based on race, gender, or social status, because it never seems to end well, and only seems to cause strife. I will continue to approach people in society the way I always have - with fairness and an equal chance to either be a jerk, or not. I will then react accordingly.

[Yoda]

I read your claim earlier, so I get it. But what will that self-reflection achieve? I already treat people well. I treat them with respect and I try to get to know them for who they are, and the things they care about.
Well, Devil's Advocate, but respect isn't exactly binary. Presumably we all have some blind spots that stop us from being better people, even if we're "good" by most standards. And obviously by definition you won't have any idea what specifically it might achieve (if anything), because if you did it would no longer be necessary to achieve it.

It's kinda like asking someone if they're right about everything (we'd all say no), and asking them what specific thing they're wrong about (we wouldn't be able to come up with anything, because if we knew it was wrong we wouldn't believe it any more).

[mattiasflgrtll6]

If it’s about our sex lives, please don’t.

Depends on how sexy and famous we all are.

[Citizen Rules]

In order:
Young? Probably, I'm almost 30 though so I'm confronting the grim visage of my own mortality. Which is to say that my body doesn't feel invincible and it sucks.


Affluent family? Eh. My dad is a preacher and my mom is a public school teacher (my mom makes more than my dad). I felt pretty middle class for whatever that's worth. Maybe I didn't have everything I wanted, but I never felt worried about getting basic needs met.

Parents paid for college? Actually, it was the reverse, I paid for myself (and took out loans) and let my parents keep me as a dependent for tax relief which meant I didn't get financial aid!

There's this odd tax deduction thing that exists for preachers that totally screwed me over on the FAFSA. They didn't pay for any of my college and that deduction made it so that I didn't qualify for any grants. I went to community college for a couple years (and found out I loved it) and that I could handle because community college is an AMAZING deal. I transferred for a 4 year and I let my parents keep me on as a tax deduction (which, honestly, was a financial miscalculation, turns out I would have been better off paying my parents that deduction and not being a dependent, unfortunately by the time I took econ courses on this I was off their dependency). When I turned 26 and was off my parent's tax dependency I qualified for LOTS of aid. I also won a few scholarships in economics that helped out a lot. I only took out loans on 2 years of state university, but it was quite a bit of money still and I'll be paying it off for a decade at least.

Of course, the costs of providing for me over my life were far more than what I lost out on during college. But to your question, no, they didn't contribute to my ability to go to college (and would not be able to without financial stress on their part, I'm not blaming them).

And I don't feel much "white guilt", because again, I anticipate doing my best to use the partially unearned position in society I have to extend the opportunity I have to others. Maybe I'd feel guilt if I didn't do that? Dunno.

But I definitely feel privileged. For being white, and for many other things.


To be totally honest, my family wasn't totally good or kind to me during my developing years. We're cool now, for the most part. The "family" privilege I feel is the completely incredible and nurturing group of friends I lucked my way into. That was a very complete answer and frank too, which I appreciate. So thanks for that and I repped you.

I don't have any follow up questions, but I suppose it's only fair that you can ask me questions now about what I mean. Assuming you're interested.

See I'm thinking some people have a different ideas in mind when they say the term 'white privilege'. I know what's in my mind, but no one can know what's in another persons mind. That's why I don't think it's a good or accurate term.

[Slappydavis]

@Slappydavis (http://www.movieforums.com/community/member.php?u=86075)

How much do you think your whiteness added to your current position? Does your whiteness ever keep you from feeling proud of what you've accomplished or whatever it is that you are on track to accomplish? Do you think of being white as being akin to taking steroid? And by that, I mean that even if you take a steroids, you still have to work out for it to do anything for you. And I know that people choose to take steroids, but they don't choose to be white. That part of the metaphor is not what I'm referring to.
Re: How much did being white contribute to my life-
Oh it's definitely hard to say with certainty. And I wouldn't expect basically anyone to tell.


The piece that really stands out for me is how much I was pushed into college. Like I mentioned before, my highschool grades were not great, and yet people told me all the time that I seemed like the kind of person that would just go to college. Some of that was probably due to my parents both being educated (my dad was halfway to being an engineer before having a powerful dream that made him quit and take up being a pastor), some of that was due to me hanging around kids that DID get good grades, but some of that was almost certainly that I was white.


Another piece where there was a noticeable difference is that that I wasn't bullied in school. By all accounts, I was your typical bullying target, I was small (still am), quiet (less so now), and nerdy (definitely). But I wasn't bullied. The kids of color were bullied (to the point that one of the black kids at my school had to loudly talk about how much he hated black culture seriously ALL of the time just to get it to stop) and the LGBT kids were bullied (incessantly, seriously it was crazy). But I grew up in a white & conservative area. So while I was a seriously fantastic bullying target, I was still "in" because I was straight & white.


Maybe that's just the way my schools are, and it's idiosyncratic to my life, but it's something I realized after doing the sort of self-reflection I'm talking about.






Re: Steroids- The steroid example is interesting, and I think I see where you're going with it. Without putting a ton of thought into this metaphor, to me high economic status are steroids, where being white is more like just being default (that sort of default status comes in a lot to conversations about white privilege too, as you probably know) and being non-white is more like someone making you carry a barbell. Is it always totally debilitating? No. Is it harder than it should be? Yeah.




Re: Pride- I'm totally proud of who I am and what I've done! I'm not proud of everything, but I like myself a whole lot! Probably too much! But a lot of my pride in myself is totally separate from economic status (which is one of the most direct places where race comes into play).


If I'm guessing at where you're going correctly: would I tell someone who is very proud of their economic status that they should be less proud because they were on "easy mode" (so to speak)?


Not really. It's more like this for me. I think you should totally be proud of the way that you took the advantages given to you and were able to find a productive spot in society. But you should ALSO take pride in the advantages themselves, and recognize the parts that you didn't do on your own, and maintain them for other people to use.


I'll put it a different way. If someone was able to produce on fertile soil in such a way that they died a millionaire but the soil was left arid/useless, I probably wouldn't think they should be very proud. If someone was able to produce on fertile soil AND they were able to help other people get access to similarly fertile soil, then yeah! Be proud!


Getting a random advantage isn't something to be ashamed of, it's more like something that you owe to society to keep it going. The parts that I might say would be "shameful" would be getting an advantage that comes at the expense of other people. But the world isn't a zero-sum game, so you CAN both get an advantage AND share it with others so that everyone is a little better off.

[Slappydavis]

I read your claim earlier, so I get it. But what will that self-reflection achieve? I already treat people well. I treat them with respect and I try to get to know them for who they are, and the things they care about.

My life was shaped by my family and I being poor in the 70s and 80s. My single mother bought my clothes at a second hand store and we stood in line for Government cheese. I could self-reflect about that, and how it seemed unfair at the time, but instead I choose to look forward and make an effort to actively change my situation. I have made a lot of progress through a lot of hard work. I have also seen people of all stripes do both better and worse than me, usually due to the decisions they make in their lives.

You seem smart, and thought experiments are fun to think about, but I always find that reality tends to play out a little differently when I try to apply them to my life.

Personally, I dislike grouping people into groups based on race, gender, or social status, because it never seems to end well, and only seems to cause strife. I will continue to approach people in society the way I always have - with fairness and an equal chance to either be a jerk, or not. I will then react accordingly.


I believe you when you say that you treat people with respect, but I think the self-reflection helps define what treating people with respect means.


The reason I bring up Rawl's Veil is that it's actually not just a thought experiment, it's a true guiding principle that you can test social structures against. I love those overly technical iterations of weird convoluted thought experiments too, but this is a truly practical baseline test.


Basically, the question it asks is how would you design society if you didn't know where you'd fall into it. If you can truly reflect on your beliefs about what society should look like and think that it would be best even if you happened to be born a different person, then it "passes" Rawl's Veil.


The people I disagree with (conservatives, generally) can totally pass this test if they honestly believe what they preach too. There are absolutely some wealthy people that think (and are possibly correct) that the wealth distribution TRULY benefits all people including those in the lower income brackets, they'd pass Rawl's Veil.


Technically, white supremacists *could* pass Rawl's Veil too. If they truly think that white people are actually the best suited to be the ruling class, and the world is better off that way, they pass Rawl's Veil. But it's my belief that if they were able to enter true self-reflection that most of the time they'd recognize that no, really it's just that I want like-me's to be the ruling class. That's why I think self-reflection is important, and that methods that encourage self-reflection (like acknowledgement of privilege) helps guide people towards better outcomes.

[jiraffejustin]

Slappydavis

Do you think there is a better way to frame the conversation of "white privilege" so that it doesn't come off as accusatory? The term clearly isn't as dramatic as the "n-word for white people", because there obviously is no such term. However, just because it isn't as bad as that, there is some point where when you tell people "you have an unearned advantage because of how you were born" that it's reasonable they will get huffy over it. It can come off like you are challenging their accomplishments or trivializing their struggles. Is the onus entirely on them to recognize what you are saying is not that at all, or do you think there is another way to approach the topic in a broad way that will at least make the conversation less inflammatory than it generally seems to be?

[Slappydavis]

@Slappydavis (http://www.movieforums.com/community/member.php?u=86075)

Do you think there is a better way to frame the conversation of "white privilege" so that it doesn't come off as accusatory? The term clearly isn't as dramatic as the "n-word for white people", because there obviously is no such term. However, just because it isn't as bad as that, there is some point where when you tell people "you have an unearned advantage because of how you were born" that it's reasonable they will get huffy over it. It can come off like you are challenging their accomplishments or trivializing their struggles. Is the onus entirely on them to recognize what you are saying is not that at all, or do you think there is another way to approach the topic in a broad way that will at least make the conversation less inflammatory than it generally seems to be?
I'd rather the idea of privilege not be seen as something that detracts from worth in general.


It reminds of of that Obama speech that I loved but that got negative attention, the "You didn't build that" speech. I loved the sentiment, it's just that it should have been "If you've got a business – you didn't build that alone".


I'd hope that taking an advantage and building into something that benefits a lot of people is seen as a good thing. But, IMO, we focus too much on individual accomplishment to the detriment of society's influence on our lives.


Take pride in what you've done and make sure you keep yourself healthy. Take pride in what society has done, and make sure you keep society healthy.

[Slappydavis]

Oh, and just realized part of your question is probably asking if I think there's some people that use the concept to silence discussion.

And yes, that exists, there are plenty of people using it that way and it's frustrating to me, but it can (and more often is afaik) be used in a productive way.

[jiraffejustin]

Slappydavis thanks for all of the responses to my questions. I'm not sure if I have anything else I want to respond to or ask you. You are right when you say these conversations are fatiguing. You've been great, but they are pretty heavy and can weigh on you. I just don't want that weight on me for the rest of the day. Maybe I'll think of something for a later time, but for now, just enjoy your day, man. :up:

[MovieGal]

https://cdn.iwastesomuchtime.com/3220161825169.png

https://meme.xyz/uploads/posts/t/l-13906-dont-mind-me-im-just-enjoying-my-white-privilege.jpg

[MovieGal]

'White privilege' as applied to today's world is a politically incorrect phrase. All anyone has to do is to read the verbose, indignant replies on this thread, to see that the term 'white privilege' to white people is akin to racial slurs to minorities. It's deeply offensive...As it's racism to blame an entire race for past privileges by some members of that same race.

Once there was white privilege decades ago, today it's used as excuse to explain why many minorities remain poor and disadvantaged. The advantage today in America for college applications and jobs goes to minorities and women as a result of institutionalized affirmation action programs.

The correct phrase to use today is 'Economic Privilege', people born to families of wealth (regardless of their skin color) have a higher chance of going to college and of landing great jobs and buying a house and having the means to live financially secure. Meanwhile those born to improvised families have a hard time bettering their own lives. That holds true regardless of skin color.

A poor white person like myself couldn't afford to go to college, so I'm in the working poor category. Not middle class, I'm the working poor... Let me tell you all, the term 'white privilege' as it applies today in America is a hateful term...and if we don't start embracing the idea that we are all one people on one big planet, then we're doomed to hate each other based on skin pigments.

yes.. I agree.. White Privilege is a degrading word in today's society. I wasn't raised white privilege. I didn't have the best education or college or anything. My parents couldn't afford it.

My mother worked part-time on and off during her life for Sears & Roebuck. She stopped working to take care of 5 children. Only after my youngest sister was in 4th grade did my mom go back to work. My father worked for General Motor's here in Kansas City. His check for 1 week was $350 bring home but understand this was during the 1970s. My parents didn't give us the best but we had a roof over our head and food on the table.

And I have to work a full-time job to get by.

My honest opinion of "White Privilege"? "F**k White Privilege, your sh*t still stinks too!"

[cricket]

White Privilege is a myth perpetuated by liberals. Take most countries from Asia and their average household income in America is higher than whites. The average Nigerian household in America makes more than the average white household, and the reason is that they go to and graduate from college at a high rate. American born blacks are behind whites, yes, but that's because of the extremely high rate of single mother families, and the very poor high school graduation rate. These two factors directly result in more crime and poverty. You can't say one group is privileged being ahead of another group when that group has massive shortcomings that need to be improved.

[cricket]

One thing that may be a privilege-affirmative action.

[CiCi]

I'm not ashamed to be white. And even as a Bernie/Stein supporter I do think PC culture can go too far. See: Drag queens being roasted and harrassed for offensive humour, cultural appropriation in a lot of cases etc.

That being said, as privileged as I am to be in an advanced country, I really am not proud to be British because of our history with commonwealth countries and the like. It kinda confuses me when I see people over here heralding the empire like it was some sort of utopia we should go back to.

[TheUsualSuspect]

I'm not ashamed to be white. And even as a Bernie/Stein supporter I do think PC culture can go too far. See: Drag queens being roasted and harrassed for offensive humour, cultural appropriation in a lot of cases etc.

That being said, as privileged as I am to be in an advanced country, I really am not proud to be British because of our history with commonwealth countries and the like. It kinda confuses me when I see people over here heralding the empire like it was some sort of utopia we should go back to.

Meh, I'm proud to be Canadian despite their treatment and supposed continued treatment of aboriginal people.

[Sedai]

Well, Devil's Advocate, but respect isn't exactly binary. Presumably we all have some blind spots that stop us from being better people, even if we're "good" by most standards. And obviously by definition you won't have any idea what specifically it might achieve (if anything), because if you did it would no longer be necessary to achieve it.

It's kinda like asking someone if they're right about everything (we'd all say no), and asking them what specific thing they're wrong about (we wouldn't be able to come up with anything, because if we knew it was wrong we wouldn't believe it any more).

Agreed. I want to clarify that I am not claiming that I have no more personal growth to achieve, as I work every single day to expand and grow both physically and mentally, with better results some days than others. I also understand that I could and probably do have weaknesses in certain areas. I just don't think basing personal growth around concepts of race/skin color is the best possible path.

I decided long ago to accept that some people have it easier than others, and that each person must just buckle down and work to overcome any obstacles they may face. I certainly understand that some folks face obstacles imposed on them due to certain aspects that perhaps shouldn't create obstacles in the first place. The disconnect for me arises when I try to quantify how me admitting I have privilege will somehow change that for the other person, when i already strive to treat them equally and with the respect every human deserves. I speak to them equally, if they came to my place of business looking for work, I would consider hiring them equally etc. Actually, if they spoke another language, like Spanish or Portuguese, they would probably get the job over someone who didn't, as that would help our business greatly at them moment.

My point being, is that I tend to always look at each person as an individual, judging them on merit, achievement, and conduct, with stuff like skin color not really registering, because I was raised to not judge people by their race or gender. Further disconnect arises when I consider that my mother was (but is now no longer) a liberal, as were most of my teachers, and at the time, all these people on the left frowned upon judging people by their skin color. This seems to have almost completely reversed now, with the left constantly putting identity politics and other more superficial qualities over everything else. It seems hypocritical to me, and is part of the reason myself and others I know that were left-leaning long ago have slowly tilted over to the center-right.

[Gangland]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IPKL1Oy-CA

[Slappydavis]

You can't say one group is privileged being ahead of another group when that group has massive shortcomings that need to be improved.
Obviously, you can. And I think you know that.

Even along the spectrum you were talking about (wealth) you can find shortcomings to being born into a very wealthy household (pressure of expectations, media attention, etc.), but is the locating of drawbacks the same as saying there's no overall advantage? I don't think so.

That's not an argument against white privilege, that's an argument against the concept of privilege altogether.

Again, if you deny that concept, you're going to miss out on opportunities to have a more accurate picture of yourself. And that has actual consequences as success without reflection on the factors of that success seems to overwhelmingly cause the successful person to attribute the factors to themselves entirely. Which, objectively, isn't true (and is an example of facts over feelings, by the way).



Edit:
And to your point about the different groups, that's an example of the sort of reflection I'm talking about. It's a sort of dialogue you can have.

Here's a couple very simplified examples

1) Certain Asian groups seem to do economically well, let's reflect on that.
2) It seems like those Asian groups tend to go to college at higher rates.
3) Perhaps college is the dominant factor in their success.

Let's just say this is true. Then not only do you figure out that it's not by the virtue of being Asian that causes their success, you find out that college is a factor in success that you can now apply to others.

Reflection on white privilege also allows you to find out what ISN'T white privilege as well. It's about an honest attempt to isolate the contributing factors to your life. If you enter reflection about it, and honestly find that overall you didn't benefit, then that's good learning. I should also say that if a white person enters reflection and finds nothing but advantages or a black person enters reflection and finds nothing but advantages, that strikes me as unlikely; whether those factors, in net, add up to an overall advantage is a different story.

I'll note here that I see a lot of people perfectly willing to talk about the barriers in their life and not the help they got. And I want to be clear, you shouldn't ignore the barriers either, you should acknowledge BOTH.

[cricket]

Obviously, you can. And I think you know that.

Even along the spectrum you were talking about (wealth) you can find shortcomings to being born into a very wealthy household (pressure of expectations, media attention, etc.), but is the locating of drawbacks the same as saying there's no overall advantage? I don't think so.

That's not an argument against white privilege, that's an argument against the concept of privilege altogether.

Again, if you deny that concept, you're going to miss out on opportunities to have a more accurate picture of yourself. And that has actual consequences as success without reflection on the factors of that success seems to overwhelmingly cause the successful person to attribute the factors to themselves entirely. Which, objectively, isn't true (and is an example of facts over feelings, by the way).



Edit:
And to your point about the different groups, that's an example of the sort of reflection I'm talking about. It's a sort of dialogue you can have.

Here's a couple very simplified examples

1) Certain Asian groups seem to do economically well, let's reflect on that.
2) It seems like those Asian groups tend to go to college at higher rates.
3) Perhaps college is the dominant factor in their success.

Let's just say this is true. Then not only do you figure out that it's not by the virtue of being Asian that causes their success, you find out that college is a factor in success that you can now apply to others.

Reflection on white privilege also allows you to find out what ISN'T white privilege as well. It's about an honest attempt to isolate the contributing factors to your life. If you enter reflection about it, and honestly find that overall you didn't benefit, then that's good learning. I should also say that if a white person enters reflection and finds nothing but advantages or a black person enters reflection and finds nothing but advantages, that strikes me as unlikely; whether those factors, in net, add up to an overall advantage is a different story.

I'll note here that I see a lot of people perfectly willing to talk about the barriers in their life and not the help they got. And I want to be clear, you shouldn't ignore the barriers either, you should acknowledge BOTH.

I like how you put things, but I don't see an argument that there is such a thing as white privilege, if you were trying to make one. Obviously there are people of all races that have privilege that has nothing to do with their skin color.

[Citizen Rules]

I've been thinking about the phrase 'white privilege'. And I think, in part, this concept/phrase stems from: privileged liberal college kids who know they didn't earn their privileged life, and they feel guilty about having so much when so many others have so little...

So instead of taking responsibility for their own guilt and dealing with it, they choose to collectively blame the entire white race for their own guilt. Blaming others for one's own privileged guilt is wrong.


And it serves no purpose in making the world a better place for all. What it does is polarize races and further drive a wedge into race relations. Don't believe me, go up to a black person today and tell them you admit your white privilege and see what happens? You'll piss off the black person who will likely think you're a uppity little white person and rightly so. How does that make things better? It doesn't.

Then find a homeless white person and remind them of their white privilege. They'd probably tell you to go to hell. How does that make things better? It doesn't.

People need to think of the real world ramifications of going around telling everyone they have white privilege.

[cricket]

I just f'n hate it when people bring up skin color at all.

[Citizen Rules]

I just f'n hate it when people bring up skin color at all. Yup, this quote from MLK is where we should be heading. Instead we've started heading away from it in the last years.

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=46964

[cricket]

You wonder if any of the people who've been crying racism recently realize that they're setting us all back.

[Chypmunk]

I just f'n hate it when people bring up skin color at all.
Completely with you bruh, I've got absolutely no time for bulimic cannibals either :down:

[MovieGal]

I just f'n hate it when people bring up skin color at all.

I feel the same way.

Split us all open, we are the same inside.

[Stirchley]

The OP question makes no sense. It’s like asking if I’m sorry I’m a woman or am I sorry I’m British or am I sorry I’m tall? What would be the point of being sorry for something I was born with & cannot change even if I wanted to?

[mattiasflgrtll6]

Well, the mentality the question poses is unfortunately more common than you'd think :/ I do think it's kind of a dumb topic though.

[Camo]

No one should be sorry that they're white or be sorry for anything that's out of their control, being white isn't a bad thing. Recognizing that you have inherent advantages (especially on a message board, christ did we need all the Jim Crow racism will die when people stop talking about it posts) is not the same as condemning your race and saying white people don't suffer, and it being compared to racial slurs is possibly the most horrifying and ignorant thing i've read on this site which is saying a lot. If you're brought up at a lower level of class white or not you're going to struggle but even then you have inherent advantages and perks over non-whites in your same class (not saying joe from Missouri has it easier than Denzel Washington coz he's white).

Affirmitive Action is not a privilege because it was implemented purely to counter-act racist hiring and admission practices, things that still exist today. I don't know the extent it's implemented today, maybe it needs to be lowered but more than anything it's a safeguard to prevent prejudical biases from taking hold. When whites start having problems being hired because they are thought of as an example of their race then they can complain, far-left colleges are about the only place this'd be a problem for whites and they still probably outnumber non-whites in any given college.

Yes there's extremists (often white which is absurd) that have co-opted the term to mean whites need to pay with their white blood cells or whatever. But there's extremists in literally everything, could google for two minutes and find a dude ranting about white privilege who also thinks the jews need to die or whatever. Would be kinda harsh and innaccurate using those people as an example of a person that doesn't believe in white privilege.

Here's the essay that pretty much sparked this whole thing. Before reading it please don't pick up on a point you don't think applies to you, or is more class than race related to disprove it or whatever coz it's her own self-reflection and the point is if you think about it you do inherently benefit from your races dominance. If anyone says they don't think a single point is true i straight up don't believe them. Think it's worth taking into account that she initially wrote a Male Advantages Essay then when someone brought up her own White Advantages she self-reflected and came up with that. It's also especially important to keep in mind this was written in 1989, no one gave a sh*t then, it wasn't some reaction piece to what's happening now. Doubt anyone that already disagrees will care but if you're interested i could link a lot of stuff past this to give you a deeper understanding of this point of view.

http://www.racialequitytools.org/resourcefiles/mcintosh.pdf

[cricket]

But I'm still looking for what privilege (advantage) white people have. We know that non whites have been given advantages in employment, academics, lending, etc. What advantages have whites been given?

[Camo]

But I'm still looking for what privilege (advantage) white people have. We know that non whites have been given advantages in employment, academics, lending, etc. What advantages have whites been given?

Did you read the essay? What did you think of it? Would you like me to post more?

[cricket]

I started reading and she quickly lost me.

[cricket]

For example, I don't consider not being followed in a supermarket a privilege.

[Camo]

For example, I don't consider not being followed in a supermarket a privilege.

Yeah, i dunno. Seems like you didn't read my last paragraph either. Whatever.

[cricket]

Yeah, i dunno. Seems like you didn't read my last paragraph either. Whatever.

I did, and I also read more than just thar one point that the author made. It seems like she was trying to make points by stating examples of disadvantages that blacks have faced, and claiming that means they are automatically advantages for whites. I don't agree with that.

[Camo]

I did, and I also read more than just thar one point that the author made. It seems like she was trying to make points by stating examples of disadvantages that blacks have faced, and claiming that means they are automatically advantages for whites. I don't agree with that.

Disadvantages for blacks in America (which she was writing about) are advantages for whites though? Even if they partially advantage other races they definitely advantage whites?

White Privilege isn't some grand evil conspiracy perpetuated by whites (unless they forgot to invite me!) that means whites will always beat non-whites. Rather, it's a bunch of small things that advantage whites in white European & North American Nations as a whole.

[cricket]

Whites should absolutely have advantages over blacks

that is until factors such as crime, education, and fathers in the household even out.

If it were a level playing field, then sure there would be white privilege.

[Camo]

Whites should absolutely have advantages over blacks

that is until factors such as crime, education, and fathers in the household even out.

If it were a level playing field, then sure there would be white privilege.

It's surprising how long it took for your inner Stormfront to come out.

Oh well, +8 rep Cricket!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfeNhwnO8hw

[cricket]

But you know what I mean right?

It's not an advantage if you've earned it. The average white man should get a better job than the average black man, simply because they have the better average education.

Take race out of the equation completely. The average man of any race who graduates high school will get a better job that the average man of any race who doesn't. It just so happens that blacks have a much lower graduation rate.

Obviously there's more to it than equal opportunity employment, but it seems that any difference can be explained by cultural factors.

[Camo]

It just so happens

Big fan of this phrase too. Have a habit of trying to understand why "it just so happens" though, i don't go out and join the Klan.

[cricket]

Big fan of this phrase too. Have a habit of trying to understand why "it just so happens" though, i don't go out and join the Klan.

It's a big problem, and I just assume it has a lot to do with fatherless children. I don't know but something needs to change.

[Camo]

Black men, stop leaving your children! - Message Board Eagles Fan

[cricket]

Is there anything I said that you disagree with?

[cricket]

For the record Cricket edited one of his posts with more than i initially responded to above, me singling out "It just so happens" looks a lot worse now because he has added to it. It was initially like three sentences.

No, for the record I certainly did not edit any such post and I'm sure Yoda could back me up on it.

[Camo]

No, for the record I certainly did not edit any such post and I'm sure Yoda could back me up on it.

Right, i apologize for that then. I just thought it was shorter than that. Was confused.

[cricket]

No that's ok, but is there anything I said that you disagree with?

[Camo]

No that's ok, but is there anything I said that you disagree with?

This and that other post as long as you believe your experience is comparable to a black one:

Whites should absolutely have advantages over blacks

that is until factors such as crime, education, and fathers in the household even out.

If it were a level playing field, then sure there would be white privilege.

[Camo]

Negative factors have to even out before whites stop taking advantages!

[Camo]

Negative factors have to even out before whites stop taking advantages!

Hey, wait a minute!

Sorry bro, just reporting the truths!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqPtz5qN7HM

[cricket]

I would assume that whites who have a 2 parent household, graduate high school, and don't commit crime have an advantage over whites who come from a 1 parent household, don't graduate high school, and commit crime.

I prefer to take something as meaningless as skin color out of it.

[Camo]

I would assume that whites who have a 2 parent household, graduate high school

Isn't that like #1 on the essay i linked? What was your problem with it, again?

[cricket]

Isn't that like #1 on the essay i linked? What was your problem with it, again?

That's not a privilege. People need to take personal responsibility.

[Camo]

That's not a privilege. People need to take personal responsibility.

People can do both.

[Captain Steel]

I'm not white - I'm beige, ecru, tan, pink, mauve, blonde, purple (when I have bruises which is most of the time), with ugly visible blue lines running under my skin, now I've got these red dots I wish I could get rid of (and from what I've heard the only way to get rid of them is to burn them off!)

[cricket]

People can do both.

I believe that having two parents and finishing high school should be the baseline. I don't think people are given an advantage because they have that. Because some people have the disadvantage of not having that, that doesn't change what the other side has been given.

[Camo]

I believe that having two parents and finishing high school should be the baseline. I don't think people are given an advantage because they have that. Because some people have the disadvantage of not having that, that doesn't change what the other side has been given.

What do you think black people are doing wrong?

[cricket]

What do you think black people are doing wrong?

We know what they are doing wrong but the question is why. I can't believe that it has anything to do with something so insignificant as skin color. My only guess is that a big part of it is because of sins from the past, but it's important to remember that the people of today are not to blame. Everybody has to come together much better than we are now. Misidentifying the root of the problem will only make it a bigger problem.

[Captain Steel]

We know what they are doing wrong but the question is why. I can't believe that it has anything to do with something so insignificant as skin color. My only guess is that a big part of it is because of sins from the past, but it's important to remember that the people of today are not to blame. Everybody has to come together much better than we are now. Misidentifying the root of the problem will only make it a bigger problem.

This reminded me of South Park's spoof of those Ancestry web sites!
"I'm 21% victim!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKxtXzAgGew

[Camo]

We know what they are doing wrong

I don't? What are they doing wrong?

[MovieGal]

I'm purple...where is my purple privilege?

[cricket]

I don't? What are they doing wrong?

We already talked about it. The men are not being fathers. Children who do not have fathers don't do as well as children that do, hence the high school drop out rate and the crime rate.

[cricket]

I'm purple...where is my purple privilege?

You get Apollonia

http://ilosm.cdnize.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/purple-rain-apollonia-and-prince.jpg

[MovieGal]

You get Apollonia

http://ilosm.cdnize.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/purple-rain-apollonia-and-prince.jpg

No....sorry only into men and Prince isn't one either

[cricket]

Pretty weird that black men are just collectively agreeing to not be fathers or whatever, it's almost like who knows....

It's a vile and destructive generalization..

I don't know why it happens but it happens at a crazy rate in the black community.

It's a vicious cycle. Less likely to have a father means less likely to get an education. Less likely to get an education means more likely to commit crime. A crime is committed and daddy is in jail. I don't know what the solution is?

[MovieGal]

He's pink polka dotted....where is his privilege?

https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/christmasspecials/images/5/5a/SpottedElephant.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20120724065016

I do this because white privilege is bullsh*t.

[Camo]

I don't know why it happens but it happens at a crazy rate in the black community.

It's a vicious cycle. Less likely to have a father means less likely to get an education. Less likely to get an education means more likely to commit crime. A crime is committed and daddy is in jail. I don't know what the solution is?

Do you think centuries of pro-white policies has nothing to do with black struggles?

Are they just more likely to not have two parent families coz they aren't that good?

[cricket]

This is from afro.com but anybody can find this information in many places-


In its annual “America’s Families and Living Arrangements” data collection, the Bureau examined marriage and family, the living arrangements of older adults and other household characteristics.

It found that a majority of the 73.7 million American children under age 18 live in families with two parents (69 percent)—a decrease from 88 percent in 1960. Of those 50.7 million children living in families with two parents, 47.7 million live with two married parents and 3 million live with two unmarried parents.

Broken down by race, however, the statistics show stark differences. The percentage of White children under 18 who live with both parents almost doubles that of Black children, according to the data. While 74.3 percent of all White children below the age of 18 live with both parents, only 38.7 percent of African-American minors can say the same.

Instead, more than one-third of all Black children in the United States under the age of 18 live with unmarried mothers—compared to 6.5 percent of White children. The figures reflect a general trend: During the 1960-2016 period, the percentage of children living with only their mother nearly tripled from 8 to 23 percent and the percentage of children living with only their father increased from 1 to 4 percent.

Social scientists have long espoused the benefits for children who live in two-parent homes, including economic, educational, health and other advantages.

[cricket]

The crazy thing is that this has become a much bigger problem since the civil rights movement.

[Camo]

Afro.com

What happens with the blacks?

[cricket]

Do you think centuries of pro-white policies has nothing to do with black struggles?

I don't know but don't blame whitey when a black man puts it in his girl and runs off.

Are they just more likely to not have two parent families coz they aren't that good?

Huh?

[Camo]

Anyway, i'm done

[MovieGal]

Hey my elephant was a misfit too! He was discriminated and cast off!!!

[cricket]

Didn't you say earlier: people should stop talking about race they are holding us back?

You know that was the Jim Crow argument, right?

Yea I don't think it's because of skin color.

Who's Jim Crow?

[MovieGal]

Yea I don't think it's because of skin color.

Who's Jim Crow?

Wtf? Did you go to high school.in the US?

[Camo]

Yea I don't think it's because of skin color.

Who's Jim Crow?

a bro, good luck in the coming year

[MovieGal]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws

[cricket]

Wtf? Did you go to high school.in the US?

I only went for a little over a year.

[cricket]

cricket it was this one - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws

kinda hope you drown now but i at least don't think you're that dumb.

I looked at that and I don't have the same beliefs as him. What does he have to do with anything?

[Camo]

White privilege is not knowing what Jim Crow is and having a strong well known opinion about black men anyway.

[cricket]

White privilege is not knowing what Jim Crow is and having a strong well known opinion about black men anyway.

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSUTQmruzVpZrjCY9jDrTJ7dFz1vbfbIoDgvszyYWI6BbgB1-KS

[Camo]

White privilege is not knowing what Jim Crow is and having a strong well known opinion about black men anyway.

? Really hate my posts being edited. ..Like i'mdone****kkkk

[Camo]

**** off

[mattiasflgrtll6]

?
I don't see any edits made with your post.


But yeah, I have no idea what cricket's trying to say here. I guess everybody has their bad days.

[cricket]

White privilege is not knowing what Jim Crow is and having a strong well known opinion about black men anyway.

I find it hilarious that this post was repped considering I haven't given much of an opinion on black men. I've given facts and said I don't know why that is.

You do seem to have a strong opinion though. Have you lived in predominantly black neighborhoods, gone to predominantly black schools, or just read some things?

[cricket]

But yeah, I have no idea what cricket's trying to say here. I guess everybody has their bad days.

What part seems odd?

[mattiasflgrtll6]

I don't know, something about this just doesn't read right:

I don't know but don't blame whitey when a black man puts it in his girl and runs off.

While it might be true many black parents are adandoning their children, it's important to remember the circumstances. People who live in poor black neighborhoods have it tough, and feel they might not really have what it takes to take care of their kids. I'm not saying it ever is right to abandon your kid, but the fact is that they live under very harsh circumstances and are not getting the help they need. The fact that neighborhoods like these at all exist tells there's still a segregation problem in America, albeit not on the same level as before. By just repeating how black men keep adandoning their children, all you're really doing is repeating a problem as if it predominantly has to do something with being black, when really it has to do more with entire communities of people getting ignored. Which if it's not your intention, I apologize, but it did come off that way.

[cricket]

I don't know, something about this just doesn't read right:



While it might be true many black parents are adandoning their children, it's important to remember the circumstances. People who live in poor black neighborhoods have it tough, and feel they might not really have what it takes to take care of their kids. I'm not saying it ever is right to abandon your kid, but the fact is that they live under very harsh circumstances and are not getting the help they need. The fact that neighborhoods like these at all exist tells there's still a segregation problem in America, albeit not on the same level as before. By just repeating how black men keep adandoning their children, all you're really doing is repeating a problem as if predominantly has to do something with being black, when really it has to do more with entire communities of people getting ignored. Which if it's not your intention, I apologize, but it did come off that way.

Now you see I like that answer, and I was only repeating it before because he didn't seem to understand. I also agree it has nothing to do with skin color, but it is a cultural problem. I don't know why it's such a massive problem, but I assume there are many factors just like there would be with any other race. Finding a real solution is needed rather than made up BS. It seems like people want to ignore the facts. The facts are important so the problem can be tackled head on. These communities may need more education, policing, and leadership. Just take responsibility and don't blame somebody else.

[cricket]

And just so you know where I'm coming from; I was 1 of only 4 white kids in my school in the eighth grade, while I lived in the Salvation Army in a black neighborhood. I have always had black friends, neighbors, and co-workers, and I've dated black girls. I've been a victim of racism from blacks AND whites. When I met my wife, her best friend was black. I've had black cellmates. Still, I have no clue what it's like to live in a black man's shoes. I hate racists, and I consider white privilege to be an ignorant, racist, excuse making term.

[Yoda]

I'm gonna issue a general warning. I realize this is a heated topic, but if you can't discuss it without wishing people harm or just otherwise dismissing something without an articulated disagreement (even if blunt), please do not reply. Thanks.

[Guaporense]

This reminded me of South Park's spoof of those Ancestry web sites!
"I'm 21% victim!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKxtXzAgGew

I did that and I got 0% victim! :( I want my 69 dollars back. ;)

[ash_is_the_gal]

Whites should absolutely have advantages over blacks

that is until factors such as crime, education, and fathers in the household even out.

If it were a level playing field, then sure there would be white privilege.it's **** posts like this that make Iro say he's leaving all the time lol

[Citizen Rules]

Whites should absolutely have advantages over blacks

that is until factors such as crime, education, and fathers in the household even out.

If it were a level playing field, then sure there would be white privilege.

But you know what I mean right?

It's not an advantage if you've earned it. The average white man should get a better job than the average black man, simply because they have the better average education.

Take race out of the equation completely. The average man of any race who graduates high school will get a better job that the average man of any race who doesn't. It just so happens that blacks have a much lower graduation rate.

Obviously there's more to it than equal opportunity employment, but it seems that any difference can be explained by cultural factors.

it's **** posts like this that make Iro say he's leaving all the time lolI've read 1000s of Cricket's post since I joined 4 years ago. I have never ever seen him say anything racist or hateful about members of other races.

His 1st post is poorly worded, but I'm sure he doesn't mean it as it sounds, and people are taking it out of context.

See his follow up post, he explains that whites usually have a higher degree of education due to economy advantages, so then he's saying it stands to figure that whites will have advantages over blacks because more whites get to go to college. That's not racist, in fact he's mostly agreeing with you. Try clearing your head of anger and reread what he wrote.

[Swan]

Try clearing your head of anger and reread what he wrote.

But if we do that, we can't call him a neo-Nazi!

[cricket]

it's **** posts like this that make Iro say he's leaving all the time lol

Tell me what's wrong with it.

[cricket]

I've read 1000s of Cricket's post since I joined 4 years ago. I have never ever seen him say anything racist or hateful about members of other races.

His 1st post is poorly worded, but I'm sure he doesn't mean it as it sounds, and people are taking it out of context.

See his follow up post, he explains that whites usually have a higher degree of education due to economy advantages, so then he's saying it stands to figure that whites will have advantages over blacks because more whites get to go to college. That's not racist, in fact he's mostly agreeing with you. Try clearing your head of anger and reread what he wrote.

You're right but your wrong;)

I worded it that way intentionally. People get outraged so easily these days over things that aren't actually outrageous. I was wondering if it would get an emotional reaction before someone would think about it, because I see it happening a lot.

[cricket]

And ash is the perfect bait because I've seen her react so emotionally a few times on the forum. She's compassionate and cares about people, certainly not a bad thing.

[Citizen Rules]

You're right but your wrong;)

I worded it that way intentionally. People get outraged so easily these days over things that aren't actually outrageous. I was wondering if it would get an emotional reaction before someone would think about it, because I see it happening a lot. Ahh, very clever! I get it now... In a way your post is like Starship Troopers:)

[cricket]

Ahh, very clever! I get it now... In a way your post is like Starship Troopers:)

I'm probably closer to Super Troopers.:)

[Omnizoa]

Do you ACKNOWLEGE your WHITE PRIVILEGE, whitey?
I think this should be plural, people can have individual privileges, but privilege itself is no monolith. I would sooner ask whether people acknowledge black privileges, such as those afforded through Affirmative Action rulings which legally sanction racial discrimination.

[Captain Steel]

I'm probably closer to Super Troopers.:)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is the kid who eats the pot & licks the "snozberries" in the cop car in the beginning former Congressman Jason Chaffetz or is he not? ;)

https://s.abcnews.com/images/Politics/AP_jason_chaffetz_jef_150116_16x9_992.jpg

[Captain Steel]

https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/E3kd8B8Ty6V2lj1GQslOPyWEF-o=/0x0:1000x625/1200x800/filters:focal(250x88:410x248)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/55918413/02___I_m_freaking_out_man.0.jpg

[cricket]

Like twins!


Oops, I may have just offended twins or their supporters.

[Guaporense]

There is this two hour podcast about "BEYOND THE POLITICS OF RACE" very interesting:

https://samharris.org/podcasts/134-beyond-politics-race/

[jiraffejustin]

it's **** posts like this that make Iro say he's leaving all the time lol

Okay, maybe so, but how about you tell cricket what he is wrong about. Tell cricket why what he is saying isn't accurate, how it can be offensive, or whatever. But just dropping in to say you are better than cricket, who we all know isn't a bad guy, by being snarky to somebody who is actually trying to have a conversation doesn't help anyone. You say "lol", but it doesn't come off as a joke. cricket is involved in about two pages of conversation, so he's not just trolling or trying to disrespect anyone.

One of the last things we need in this forum is two Iros who just drop in to let everybody know how awful they are and how much better he is.

[d_chatterley]

Who's Jim Crow?
:facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:

Nuff said.

[jiraffejustin]

:facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:

Nuff said.

Yeah, I guess so. You don't have to defend your point if you can look at something somebody says that's not even part of their stance and make fun of them about it.

[Yoda]

There's a real dissonance here between how people say they want to talk about these issues, and how they actually do when confronted with disagreement, as we've seen over the last few pages.

Earlier it was explained that "white privilege" is a generalized concept that holds in the aggregate, even if it doesn't apply to some individuals, and that people within that group should not be personally offended by its invocation or dismiss the idea because it doesn't apply to every one of them, right? But now, when someone wants to talk about aggregate cultural factors and how they disadvantage minorities, suddenly generalizations are awful again and anyone who raises the issue is immediately insulted and mocked. How's that work?

Also notice that "white privilege" is, when questioned, just a relatively unobjectionable concept about general advantages...except when you wanna dunk on someone who doesn't agree with you, in which case just not knowing about Jim Crow is somehow an example of it.

[Omnizoa]

Didn't you say earlier: people should stop talking about race they are holding us back?

You know that was the Jim Crow argument, right?
You know Jim Crow was a democrat, right? See, I can do it too.

[Yoda]

Saying something was a Jim Crow argument is committing the genetic fallacy, anyway. Though if we start counting fallacies we're gonna be here all night.

Mostly I'm just discouraged at how many people have feinted at wanting to talk about this stuff, when it turns out they're totally content to just find whatever they can use to make someone look bad, and then posture that this somehow makes their point or invalidates what they're being asked.

[Guaporense]

Racism exists because people think the concept of races "exists"*. If people continue talking about racism all the time (including fighting against it) the concept of races becomes more entrenched in the public mind and so people think more and more about other people in terms of race. That leads to a reinforcement of racism and doesn't solve the problem which is people judging other people by the color of their skin.

Hence why I am against affirmative action policies even if theoretically than can correct for biases. Because they are reinforcing the mentality that races exist instead of moving us along a world where people don't see each other by race. By the way, in Brazil after the government started to implement affirmative action policies in colleges the degree of racial awareness in the media and the population increased enormously which I find it a terrible development: now people have government documents where they state their "race".

*Actually, it has been scientifically proven that races don't exist. There exists different appearances between population groups from geographically distant regions but there is no such thing as "white race", "asian race", "black race", etc.

[Iroquois]

Hmm, apparently one of the problems with not keeping up with this thread is that you can only multi-quote so many people at once. Anyway...

Yup, this quote from MLK is where we should be heading. Instead we've started heading away from it in the last years.

On the other hand, consider that this means it's only fair to judge the content of people's character based on their more...defensive responses to the main topic.

You wonder if any of the people who've been crying racism recently realize that they're setting us all back.

In a couple of discussions I had with Yoda, his proposed solution for combating toxic notions and ideologies was to "draw them out and expose them" as the inherently bad ideas that they were rather than attempt to suppress them completely. While I have my reservations about this approach (especially in the context of these initial discussions about how to confront directly harmful viewpoints), I do think it's ultimately necessary to openly acknowledge these issues in a way that just doesn't revolve around having knee-jerk responses. If "crying racism" is supposedly the real problem, then the question I have is "what is the good of not crying racism?"

No....sorry only into men and Prince isn't one either

Hey Citizen, what was that line about judging content of character again?

it's **** posts like this that make Iro say he's leaving all the time lol

She's not wrong.

I've read 1000s of Cricket's post since I joined 4 years ago. I have never ever seen him say anything racist or hateful about members of other races.

His 1st post is poorly worded, but I'm sure he doesn't mean it as it sounds, and people are taking it out of context.

See his follow up post, he explains that whites usually have a higher degree of education due to economy advantages, so then he's saying it stands to figure that whites will have advantages over blacks because more whites get to go to college. That's not racist, in fact he's mostly agreeing with you. Try clearing your head of anger and reread what he wrote.

I think the particular issue is that referencing "white privilege" in the first place is supposedly inaccurate/offensive towards white people because it fails to account for factors like economic disadvantage yet that same consideration isn't being extended towards the concept of said disadvantage being compounded by the effects of racial inequality.

You're right but your wrong;)

I worded it that way intentionally. People get outraged so easily these days over things that aren't actually outrageous. I was wondering if it would get an emotional reaction before someone would think about it, because I see it happening a lot.

This approach and attitude does not help anyone or anything in the slightest.

Okay, maybe so, but how about you tell cricket what he is wrong about. Tell cricket why what he is saying isn't accurate, how it can be offensive, or whatever. But just dropping in to say you are better than cricket, who we all know isn't a bad guy, by being snarky to somebody who is actually trying to have a conversation doesn't help anyone. You say "lol", but it doesn't come off as a joke. cricket is involved in about two pages of conversation, so he's not just trolling or trying to disrespect anyone.

One of the last things we need in this forum is two Iros who just drop in to let everybody know how awful they are and how much better he is.

Yeah well we don't need users like iank or MovieGal doing driveby troll posts either that make even less of an attempty to engage, yet here we are.

[jiraffejustin]

Yeah well we don't need users like iank or MovieGal doing driveby troll posts either that make even less of an attempty to engage, yet here we are.

MovieGal definitely seems to be doing some trolling. That's true. I haven't really been reading her posts in here because of that reason, so you are right there.

As far as iank goes, he/she only posted in here once and it wasn't aimed at any particular person here. It was a silly post for sure, but at the very least everyone can tell that you aren't getting a conversation out of the person who posts that right away. Assuming that it wasn't a joke of course, which it didn't seem like it was.

[Iroquois]

Nah, iank does that any time a thread of this nature pops up. I can't tell if the one-off post is more or less annoying than if there were more posts.

[Miss Vicky]

You know Jim Crow was a democrat, right? See, I can do it too.

I do hope this was a joke.

Jim Crow was a fictional character. Also both the platforms of the Democratic and Republican parties of that era bear little resemblance to those of today. They basically switched platforms.

[cricket]

Normally I don't post in these threads because they're not topics I give a lot of thought. I just live my life and I live by the golden rule. I had a little debate with my wife a couple of weeks ago that got me thinking. She was talking about a couple of racial incidents that were on the news. One was that woman who called the police on the black people for having a public barbecue, and the other was the woman who called the police on the young black girl who was selling lemonade. So I asked her why they were racial incidents, and her response as an intelligent college educated woman was that one party was white and the other was black, and the news said they were racial incidents. This is very troubling to me and it's why I agree with Trump on at least one thing, fake news is most definitely a real thing, and I think the media is playing a large role in dividing the country. As far as these two incidents go, the news reports something to the effect of a white called the police on the black. I think this is despicable. Not long ago, the news would report an incident like 5 white guys jumping a black guy or vice versa, and follow it up with, police are investigating if the attack was racially motivated. A violent attack is newsworthy, but these two incidents were not, save for the race baiting headline. I see those two incidents, and I see one woman who appears to be mentally unstable, and one who just seems like a bitch. I see zero evidence that they are racially motivated, although they could be. Why is the news telling us the color of the parties involved in such meaningless incidents with no evidence of them being racially motivated? It's really sad and you see it every day now. It gives people who take the news as fact the wrong message and it creates the boy who cried wolf syndrome. It's like women who make false claims of rape; they're doing an injustice to rape victims. Back to those two incidents. In general, I'd say that the same people who call them racial incidents are the same people who called Donald Trump a racist for stating that the Mexican judge may have been biased against him. Guess what? You are doing the exact same thing that Donald Trump did! You are saying that someone else is racist simply based on their race with no evidence. Some people would call that racist. I don't because I think racism goes much deeper than that, and don't give me the dictionary definition because that can't begin to cover it. It is human nature to wonder and have conceptions or misconceptions. Racism or racist are ambiguous words, much like alcoholic or alcoholism. Racism is much more than just words. It's what's in your heart, and it's a body of work with how you live your life. There are cultural difference in race, that with understanding, can be made light of and celebrated. As far as this thread goes, I've been playing Devil's advocate a little bit. I'm not 100% against the idea that white privilege doesn't exist in some small form. I'm just yet to see anyone make a convincing argument for it. You could maybe say that being born white, you are statistically more likely to graduate high school, and you would be correct. The only thing I would say about that is I think the context of the term is normally associated with white adults rather than children. Ultimately, your life ends up being about your heart and mind, and the decisions you make. At some point it is all about personal responsibility. Being born privileged doesn't automatically translate into a privileged adult, although it can no matter what race you are. I also called the term white privilege a racist term, and I don't necessarily agree with that. It's most certainly a generalization based on skin color, and I would guess that most people who use the term are guilty of hypocrisy. Again, it depends on your definition of racism. Personally, I associate racism more with hate than with ignorance. I think there are people who came into this thread and left thinking I was racist simply for pointing out factual problems within the black community. I won't hold it against you. These are very real and serious problems, and black America knows it. The funny thing is that there's part of white America that denies it. How can we help the people who need it if we can't agree on issues that are right in front of our faces? There needs to be understanding for all people, including people who have different point of views than our own. In America, that includes racists. I am always tempted to say I hate racists, but even that is a generalization. How about the poor black kid who grew up being taught not to trust white people, and then was a victim of racism at a predominantly white school? Now he's 18 years old and he's racist towards white people. I can't blame him and I can't say he's a terrible person; can you? How about the old fashioned 80 year old man who lives in the sticks who thinks whites are superior to blacks because of the way he grew up in the 40's and 50's. He's never committed a crime or done harm to anybody. He may be ignorant but does that make him horrible? Of course, there's plenty of racists who are horrible people just like there's plenty of horrible people who aren't racist. Let's just not be so quick to judge. The tone of some of my posts may have rubbed some folks the wrong way, but I have had problems in my life because I am too tolerant and understanding. I am hesitant to condemn people, and the people who are not tolerant cannot understand that. My wife and I are trying to start a business. Our dream is to be able to afford to adopt a couple of black children and provide them with a better life. My whole goal with my posts in this thread was to create an analogy. Don't be so quick to judge me by some posts that you may have misunderstood, and don't be so quick to judge others. Most people deserve a break and a chance.

Iroquois

Thank you for being on the other side yet responding like a gentleman. I have seen many of your posts and they are upsetting to me. I don't want to be pushy but when I think of you, I wish you would lighten up. You are one of the best members this forum has ever had and nobody wants you to leave.

ash_is_the_gal

I don't know you well but I do know that I have disagreed with your point of view on topics like these. I see a well meaning person.


I thank everyone here who understands my point of view, even if you don't agree with it.

[pahaK]

cricket

I liked what's in your post but, my god, the representation :D That wall of text was painful to read. Please, use <Enter> every now and then.

[cricket]

cricket

I liked what's in your post but, my god, the representation :D That wall of text was painful to read. Please, use <Enter> every now and then.

Haha thanks, yea I don't put much effort into presentation. I don't post as much as I like as it is so I don't make it a priority. For some people I'm sure it comes naturally.

[Citizen Rules]

FYI for all: Jim Crow refers to a set of biased and unjust laws past in the deep south USA during the 19th century. The laws primarily brought about racial segregation under the guise of 'equal, but separate', of course that was a misnomer as the separate schools, bathrooms, water fountains, bus seating etc, was anything but equal.

The 'joke' that Omni was making is based on the fact that the south at the time was staunch Democrats...I'm sure we can all agree that segregation and Jim Crow laws were horribly wrong.

[Citizen Rules]

Cricket that was one helluva a post:up: I read it twice to get it's full depth. And you really spoke deeply about your views...I can tell you were posting honestly from your heart.

A few of my thoughts.

...I had a little debate with my wife a couple of weeks ago that got me thinking. She was talking about a couple of racial incidents that were on the news. One was that woman who called the police on the black people for having a public barbecue, and the other was the woman who called the police on the young black girl who was selling lemonade.

So I asked her why they were racial incidents, and her response as an intelligent college educated woman was that one party was white and the other was black, and the news said they were racial incidents.

This is very troubling to me and it's why...fake news is most definitely a real thing, and I think the media is playing a large role in dividing the country. I too blame the media for over sensationalism of news stories that can be 'spun' into becoming a white racial injustice against a black person. This started with the Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman case back in 2012. Some in the news media back then got in trouble for editing 911 tapes to make it sound like it was a white racist crime. That's not a comment on the case itself, but this is where the news media discovered that white on black news stories created a big buzz, boast news ratings so creates profits...It's shoddy news reporting.

I agree with you that fake news like the stories you mentioned, do great harm to our society. It creates mistrust, when we need unity. It makes people think other people are against them just because their skin tone is different. That then steals their hope for a better life, and when hope is diminished because one thinks society is stacked against them, then that person has a much harder road to travel in life.

The news media today is no better than back when William Randolph Hearst was a news paper publisher giant and used yellow journalism (fake news) to his own greedy advantage. Which is why my boy Orson Welles made Citizen Kane.

[Swan]

Cricket would probably be a cool dad. I forsee cool daddery.

[cricket]

Cricket would probably be a cool dad. I forsee cool daddery.

My wife thinks so, but I think she bases it on how I treat animals. I have very little experience with kids, but if we end up fostering or adopting, it would be older children who are generally more unwanted.

[Swan]

Maybe then you won't have to deal with poopy diapers. I heard that is stinky business.

[cricket]

Maybe then you won't have to deal with poopy diapers. I heard that is stinky business.

No doubt I have enough shlt to deal with already.

[ash_is_the_gal]

Okay, maybe so, but how about you tell cricket what he is wrong about. Tell cricket why what he is saying isn't accurate, how it can be offensive, or whatever. But just dropping in to say you are better than cricket, who we all know isn't a bad guy, by being snarky to somebody who is actually trying to have a conversation doesn't help anyone. You say "lol", but it doesn't come off as a joke. cricket is involved in about two pages of conversation, so he's not just trolling or trying to disrespect anyone.

One of the last things we need in this forum is two Iros who just drop in to let everybody know how awful they are and how much better he is.
eh. don't disservice Iro like that. he's much better at this than I am.

[ash_is_the_gal]

And ash is the perfect because I've seen her react so emotionally a few times on the forum. She's compassionate and cares about people, certainly not a bad thing.

lol, i just saw this. thanks for making me apart of your social experiment, but i thought about it what you said and decided it still sucks, and this certainly doesn't make me want to expand on that. even if i did, it wouldn't matter, because you'd just pick it apart and we'd go back and forth and nobody would learn anything new. it really is pointless. yes i'm a compassionate person. a compassionate tired person. :sick:

anyway: Yoda can the bolded bit be my new user id? :D

[cricket]

thanks for making me apart of your social experiment

I didn't, you volunteered.

but i thought about it what you said and decided it still sucks

Sure, just like many things in this world. That doesn't mean it's wrong. I guess it's ok to play make believe as long as you don't put down the ones who face the facts and actually want to figure things out.

[ash_is_the_gal]

hehe ok

here's a social experiment: white people suck most of the time.

[cricket]

hehe ok

here's a social experiment: white people suck most of the time.

That would include you.

[cricket]

I said in a previous post that I've had problems because I am very slow to condemn people. I try to see the good in everyone. That's a perfect example right there. I thought she was compassionate and well meaning. Maybe I shouldn't treat people so well.

[Yoda]

lol, i just saw this. thanks for making me apart of your social experiment, but i thought about it what you said and decided it still sucks, and this certainly doesn't make me want to expand on that. even if i did, it wouldn't matter, because you'd just pick it apart and we'd go back and forth and nobody would learn anything new. it really is pointless. yes i'm a compassionate person. a compassionate tired person. :sick:

anyway: Yoda can the bolded bit be my new user id? :D
Can I put a /s after? :D

Anyway, you know my usual thing: yeah, it's reasonable to not want to fight about politics on the Internet. Kinda lame to drop in and dump on someone and then decide you wanna leave it at that, though. In this case, I don't really see what cricket knowing about Jim Crow laws is supposed to do with the larger questions he's posing. It seems like people are looking for a reason not to have the discussion at all.

here's a social experiment: white people suck most of the time.
So...race-based generalizations are okay?

[cricket]

Imagine popping into a discussion and criticizing someone for not knowing who someone is who has nothing to do with said discussion. I could have googled him but at least I was honest. People should be embarrassed for their behavior.

[ash_is_the_gal]

Can I put a /s after? :D

Anyway, you know my usual thing: yeah, it's reasonable to not want to fight about politics on the Internet. Kinda lame to drop in and dump on someone and then decide you wanna leave it at that, though.

i know, i'm sorry for being lame. i really don't have the energy though, that's the honest truth.


So...race-based generalizations are okay?no, it was a social experiment. it was to get a reaction. you fell for it Yoda!

[ash_is_the_gal]

Can I put a /s after? :D

lol, it took me a second to get that. omg can you???

[cricket]

no, it was a social experiment. it was to get a reaction. you fell for it Yoda!

I hope that's not a comparison to me because I didn't make anything up.

[Yoda]

no, it was a social experiment. it was to get a reaction. you fell for it Yoda!
I can't tell how serious this is. I assumed you meant it, though maybe that's just because I've heard you make broad generalizations about white men before. I think I even asked the same question (IE: why is this okay, exactly?) but it was left at that.

It's like I said earlier in the thread: it's pretty obvious there are different standards for different groups. I'm not sure people appreciate how alienating this is, particularly to someone who's heard for decades that this was a bad thing to do, only to be told later that it's actually fine if it's directed at the right group.

[ash_is_the_gal]

of course there's different standards for different groups.

see, this is why i don't bother. i thought we already talked about this, and i already went into my explanation for this. ugh. i'm sorry, this is really pointless.

also, i haven't even read everything in this thread. i only just now peeked at the previous page and saw cricket's super long passionate wall of text response. next to my flippant responses, it's not right so i think i should probably stop posting in this thread, cause you're right, i'm really not interested in a long discussion that i know will achieve nothing except to wear me out.

[Yoda]

I feel bad replying after someone has said something thoughtful and decided they don't want to participate, but I do feel really compelled to respond to a few things, if only because they have implications for other people's participation in the thread, too, so sorry in advance:

of course there's different standards for different groups.
Yeah, I don't mean granular or silly things like "why do they get to use that word?!" We're talking basic stuff like "can you paint an entire group of people with the same brush based on their skin color?" That doesn't seem like something that should be okay for anyone.

see, this is why i don't bother. i thought we already talked about this, and i already went into my explanation for this.
I don't recall anyone making a serious and thoughtful defense of saying that "white people" or "white men" are any one thing as a group, no. Are you sure you don't remember just stating that they were different? A lot of time talking about these issues people say "I addressed that already," and when I go back and look "addressed" just means "I told you how it is" and not "I explained why this makes sense."

also, i haven't even read everything in this thread. i only just now peeked at the previous page and saw cricket's super long passionate wall of text response. next to my flippant responses, it's not right so i think i should probably stop posting in this thread, cause you're right, i'm really not interested in a long discussion that i know will achieve nothing except to wear me out.
I mean, it could achieve you realizing that race-based generalizations are crappy, full stop. I feel like that's a pretty achievable goal! :)

But look, if the posture here is that other people are just ignorant and stubbornly refusing to receive instruction, then you're right, nothing will be achieved. I think that's pretty self-fulfilling, though. Might see a different response if people are spoken to as equals.

[ash_is_the_gal]

i guess i feel like there's something about public debate that's weird and unsettling.

like you notice how people are usually more grandiose and dramatic and all about making grander statements in general to their opponent when they are having a debate on a public forum? usually for the rep or the likes or whatev. whether it's here, facebook, a reddit thread or whatever. and also, no one ever changes how they feel, at least not obviously. sometimes i think having discussions like this are good for the reason that you just stated (that maybe someone else reading it will think about it), but it's still a lot of nonsense.

anyway i guess i'm just saying i prefer having either discourse NOT on a public forum, or, discourse that's face to face. it's a lot more likely to have a connection with the person you're talking to that way, and there's something about that experience i find refreshing, whereas this i find draining.

anyway, i'll just continue to lurk. carry on.

[Yoda]

Yeah, that's fair re: public debate. There's a lot of nonsense and grandstanding, and there's a performative aspect that isn't productive. I guess there's a corresponding upside in that people are usually more respectful and moderated in public, but the downsides you describe are all there. And I definitely agree re: the face-to-face thing. I like to say that seeing someone's face stops you from believing they have horns.

The most compelling theory I've heard on why the Internet is so ugly is that, at a fundamental level, people are built to operate in smaller groups. We're actually really good at dealing with disagreement and nuance when we're engaging with a limited number of people, where we see them a lot and can appreciate how none of them are all good or all bad, and we get to know them and understand why they think how they do. We operate best in intimate little communities.

The Internet, however, gives us proximity without intimacy. We cannot possibly hope to grapple with the nuances of even a tiny fraction of the people whose opinions we hear, so we boil people down to one or two things out of sheer intellectual necessity.

[cricket]

i guess i feel like there's something about public debate that's weird and unsettling.

like you notice how people are usually more grandiose and dramatic and all about making grander statements in general to their opponent when they are having a debate on a public forum? usually for the rep or the likes or whatev. whether it's here, facebook, a reddit thread or whatever. and also, no one ever changes how they feel, at least not obviously. sometimes i think having discussions like this are good for the reason that you just stated (that maybe someone else reading it will think about it), but it's still a lot of nonsense.

anyway i guess i'm just saying i prefer having either discourse NOT on a public forum, or, discourse that's face to face. it's a lot more likely to have a connection with the person you're talking to that way, and there's something about that experience i find refreshing, whereas this i find draining.

anyway, i'll just continue to lurk. carry on.

I'm actually the opposite as I feel the need to be much more careful with my words here. That's an interesting perspective though and I'm sure you're not the only one.

[cricket]

Oh wait, did I say I am different when I actually agree? I should really stop reading while doing other things.

[cricket]

OK I think I'm half in agreement. I would ratger argue in person but I'm much more animated in person.

[CiCi]

i guess i feel like there's something about public debate that's weird and unsettling.

like you notice how people are usually more grandiose and dramatic and all about making grander statements in general to their opponent when they are having a debate on a public forum? usually for the rep or the likes or whatev. whether it's here, facebook, a reddit thread or whatever. and also, no one ever changes how they feel, at least not obviously. sometimes i think having discussions like this are good for the reason that you just stated (that maybe someone else reading it will think about it), but it's still a lot of nonsense.

anyway i guess i'm just saying i prefer having either discourse NOT on a public forum, or, discourse that's face to face. it's a lot more likely to have a connection with the person you're talking to that way, and there's something about that experience i find refreshing, whereas this i find draining.

anyway, i'll just continue to lurk. carry on.

I'm kinda reassuring to see someone else say this. I largely avoid even implying anything to do with politics on things like Twitter. I once defended Stormy Daniels in a sort of tongue in cheek way (I used a drag race gif) and that was enough to trigger a bunch of people to wish I was dead, to say I was a terrorist apologiser because I was left wing etc. A drag race gif. It's insane and so toxic.
It's not just the right though, last election here I got crapped on from all corners for being left wing but not a Labour supporter. The behaviour is astounding from both sides.

Meanwhile in real life I've talked to people who are staunch Trump supporters but respect my views because I respect theirs. I think it's the anonymity and ability to get into an echo chamber on the internet so easily.

Anyway, sorry for focusing on that tangent, but it's something I've found interesting in regards to forums and the like too :lol:

[cricket]

Twitter doesn't interest me at; it looks like a cesspool. The YouTube comments section is bad enough.

[Omnizoa]

I do hope this was a joke.

Jim Crow was a fictional character. Also both the platforms of the Democratic and Republican parties of that era bear little resemblance to those of today. They basically switched platforms.
Yes, and I'm well aware. The social liberals of yester-year are the economic conservatives of today.

[ashdoc]

Hey ash, I wanted to ask you - do you know the whole origin of the "Aryan" thing? Because they say it stems out of India (strange place for something that eventually turned into a Caucasoid supremacist eugenics thing to begin) - something to do with lighter-skinned Indians in Asia? I've never understood it.

one of india's biggest film stars ( shah rukh khan ) has named his son Aryan , in deference to the wishes of his hindu wife Gauri . that was about 20 years ago . during that time many hindus copied shah rukh and named their sons aryan . the popularity of the name aryan has however fallen in recent years .

https://d23ipcd5miwp4q.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Aryan-Khan-Shah-Rukh-Khan-Gauri-Khan.jpg

aryan khan and his parents shah rukh khan and gauri khan in photo above .

[Joel]

No.

[cricket]

Another piece where there was a noticeable difference is that that I wasn't bullied in school. By all accounts, I was your typical bullying target, I was small (still am), quiet (less so now), and nerdy (definitely). But I wasn't bullied. The kids of color were bullied (to the point that one of the black kids at my school had to loudly talk about how much he hated black culture seriously ALL of the time just to get it to stop) and the LGBT kids were bullied (incessantly, seriously it was crazy). But I grew up in a white & conservative area. So while I was a seriously fantastic bullying target, I was still "in" because I was straight & white.

I just read many of this thread's posts for the first time. There's a lot I disagree with, but I strongly disagree with this as an example of white privilege, respectfully. I'm wondering if you could guess why.

[Slappydavis]

I just read many of this thread's posts for the first time. There's a lot I disagree with, but I strongly disagree with this as an example of white privilege, respectfully. I'm wondering if you could guess why.
TBH I'm really not interested in reviving this topic. If you want to say why you think it's not go ahead.

I'm just letting you know instead of not replying, not ignoring you, appreciate the discussion, I just don't think this topic has been worthwhile so I'd just as well let it fade.

[cricket]

TBH I'm really not interested in reviving this topic. If you want to say why you think it's not go ahead.

I'm just letting you know instead of not replying, not ignoring you, appreciate the discussion, I just don't think this topic has been worthwhile so I'd just as well let it fade.

Completely understandable, and your grace is very much appreciated. That alone makes me respect your feelings on the matter.

You stated you grew up in a white and conservative area, and I would assume the school you went to reflected that. You were not bullied but the kids of color, who were in the minority, were. I would call this majority privilege rather than white privilege. If circumstances forced you to move and switch schools, and attend a mostly black school, you would suddenly be in the minority and most certainly be the target of bullying. If on the other hand, you attended a predominantly black school, and were somehow exempt from being victimized because you were white, I think we could have a conversation about white privilege. I think if people are going to make a case for the generalization of white privilege, it needs to go across the board. If it's all due to circumstance, it becomes circumstantial privilege.

[d_chatterley]

I will often rep somebody I am debating in a political thread even if I completely disagree with their post. It's out of respect if they are at least being thoughtful and fair. For instance, I wouldn't rep someone who randomly showed up to post nothing more than a facepalm even though they didn't understand the conversation;)

I assure you most people leaving a facepalm very much understand the conversation. It's just that it is a very appropriately succinct response at times.

[cricket]

I assure you most people leaving a facepalm very much understand the conversation. It's just that it is a very appropriately succinct response at times.

So you realize you left a facepalm because I didn't know someone who was brought up by an intoxicated person, and that someone had zero to do with the conversation?

[d_chatterley]

So you realize you left a facepalm because I didn't know someone who was brought up by an intoxicated person, and that someone had zero to do with the conversation?

It's not about who Jim Crow the character was it's about what Jim Crow laws were. The fact that you still don't know about it or are referring to a character rather than a set of laws is telling. It doesn't matter if the person who brought it up was intoxicated or not. What matters is that you went on a multi page diatribe about race and white privilege and then got exposed as not knowing what Jim Crow laws were.

If you still don't see how Jim Crow laws have anything to do with race relations and white privilege in the US, then I feel I'm really wasting my time here.

P.S Correction to your post. I left 7 facepalms.

[cat_sidhe]

So you realize you left a facepalm because I didn't know someone who was brought up by an intoxicated person, and that someone had zero to do with the conversation?

THAT INTOXICATED PERSON WASN'T ME, so you should disregard everything they said.

I'm legit the only trustworthy drunk person on MoFo! *angelface*

[cricket]

It's not about who Jim Crow the character was it's about what Jim Crow laws were. The fact that you still don't know about it or are referring to a character rather than a set of laws is telling. It doesn't matter if the person who brought it up was intoxicated or not. What matters is that you went on a multi page diatribe about race and white privilege and then got exposed as not knowing what Jim Crow laws were.

If you still don't see how Jim Crow laws have anything to do with race relations and white privilege in the US, then I feel I'm really wasting my time here.

P.S Correction to your post. I left 7 facepalms.

The Jim Crow laws have nothing to do with me or my views. If you disagree with something I said in the thread, then try to give a thoughtful counterargument. Don't come in like a hit and run coward looking to insult.

[cat_sidhe]

https://data.whicdn.com/images/283344340/original.gif



HE LOOKS SO WEARY WHEN HE SAYS THAT...