Are You SORRY You're WHITE?

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.

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

__________________
Movie Reviews | Anime Reviews
Top 100 Action Movie Countdown (2015): List | Thread
"Well, at least your intentions behind the UTTERLY DEVASTATING FAULTS IN YOUR LOGIC are good." - Captain Steel

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.

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.

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...

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.

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?"

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

She's not wrong.

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.

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

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.

__________________
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0

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.

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.

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.

__________________

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.

@cricket

I liked what's in your post but, my god, the representation 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.

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.

Cricket that was one helluva a post 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 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.

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.

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.

eh. don't disservice Iro like that. he's much better at this than I am.

__________________
letterboxd

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.

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

I didn't, you volunteered.

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.