"On White Privilege"

[Gadarene]

I believe privileges and disadvantages for all races exist; it all depends on where you look

Care to explicate this further? Colour me curious.

Are you speaking geographically, i.e. a country with a white minority is more likely to have disadvantaged whites, or do you mean where you look as in different aspects of life in the US?

 

[Ana the Ist]

You're assuming people who whinge constantly about privilege etc actually have solutions to the problems they persistently complain about.

It's becoming wildly obvious to me that they believe that complaining is a solution unto itself.

Sadly, to the rest of us...it just looks like complaining.

 

[Gadarene]

The first step in fixing a problem is recognizing the problem. A lot of racism is subconscious - we don't notice it, we don't pay attention to it, but nonetheless it's there. Ask the people who wouldn't hire black-sounding names if they were aware of this bias, and I'm willing to bet 99% of them would honestly claim that they had no idea it was going on. And you can see how many people here don't even see these things as a problem.

I don't have a solution. But the first step is ensuring that people actually understand what's going on.

Most people here acknowledge that racism exists. The issue is whether white privilege is an adequate way of framing the problem.

IME it is mostly used by people who deny that racism against white people is actually an existent thing, so I have little time for the concept. It is a rigged concept.

 

[Gadarene]

It's becoming wildly obvious to me that they believe that complaining is a solution unto itself.

Sadly, to the rest of us...it just looks like complaining.

I'm reading a great book at the moment by Nick Cohen called "What's Left" - he makes the point that a lot of modern progressivism acts this way because it requires no actual commitment to act.

I've lost count of the number of radicalists, progressives etc who are very keen on tearing systems they object to some part of down, but have very few suggestions in terms of what to replace them with, and those they do come up with are off in cloud cuckoo land.

 

[Gadarene]

...Seriously. We're going to go down this route?

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/at-the-edge/2015/05/06/institutional-racism-is-our-way-of-life

When juveniles hit the court system, it discriminates against blacks as well. Black children are 18 times more likely to be sentenced as adults than white children, and make up nearly 60 percent of children in prisons, according to the APA. Black juvenile offenders are much more likely to be viewed as adults in juvenile detention proceedings than their white counterparts.

Minor derail here, and it's into an arena I often harp on about, but for me it's another reason why I don't take the notion of privilege seriously, in pretty much any form.

Black people overwhelmingly more likely to be imprisoned than white people = white privilege.

Ok. Let's go with that.

Men overwhelmingly more likely to be imprisoned than women = female privilege doesn't exist you (redacted) MRA.

You see my problem with the concept of privilege here? It is rigged.

​

 

[Gadarene]

Nothing like taking a story about being a victim of crime and filling it with racist commentary and racial stereotypes.

Oh come on. Apart from white men not being able to run, there is no "racist commentary" to speak of.

 

[nightflight]

Minor derail here, and it's into an arena I often harp on about, but for me it's another reason why I don't take the notion of privilege seriously, in pretty much any form.

Black people overwhelmingly more likely to be imprisoned than white people = white privilege.

Ok. Let's go with that.

Men overwhelmingly more likely to be imprisoned than women = female privilege doesn't exist you (redacted) MRA.

You see my problem with the concept of privilege here? It is rigged.

​

That was marvelous.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I will grant you that even I have had the occasional experience in which my ethnicity has put me at a disadvantage (notice here I don't say my whiteness, but I mean the fact that my background is predominantly non-Anglo European).

However, I realise that on balance, most of the time, I am advantaged over people who are not white. On balance I am advantaged over people who do not speak English. On balance I am advantaged over people who are not citizens where I live. And so forth. It's about the big picture, not each and every tiny detail.

Well thanks for acknowledging that being white isn't always an advantage...but that really is the point. The irony of saying that it's "not about every little detail" while in a thread that started with an article about the color of band-aids sounds crazy. Apparently it is about every little detail.

It may be that when you add up all the advantages of being white and the advantages of being black, versus their respective disadvantages...whites may come out ahead. The problem is that we'll never have a conversation about my disadvantages. If I were to start a thread on "black privilege" and tell them they need to acknowledge it in order to make society better...I would become an instant pariah. I would be labeled racist and no one would seriously consider what I have to say.

It's not a conversation if only one side gets to be heard.

I'm not interested in attacking and shaming whites. I'm interested in diverting funds from the black hole of a defence budget into better public health measures. Into better early intervention for disadvantaged people, and for better educational access and programmes. Into creating employment opportunities (that don't ultimately result in war and further entrenching suffering). I've got a "how to fix it" list as long as my arm!

But why would I expect anyone to get behind any of those measures, unless I can demonstrate that there is a need for improvement?

I'm for all those same things...I just don't think that the problem lies where you think it does.

 

[Gadarene]

That was marvelous.

Just to be clear, I'm so white I'm transparent (love dem Irish genetics) and I'm definitely male.

The same concept used one way to address my racial advantage then gets completely flipped to deny that there could be any disadvantage I might face based on my gender. Facts and consistency don't matter. To me it is just a concept that is reshaped any time people want to attack a group they need to scapegoat in an equality discussion.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Nothing like taking a story about being a victim of crime and filling it with racist commentary and racial stereotypes.

Whoa...pump the brakes. He can't suggest that his attack was racially motivated? Is that what you're saying?

 

[Gadarene]

It's funny how we're always expected to put ourselves in the shoes of the easiest offended in society, rather than expect the easiest offended in society to walk a mile in another's big girl/boy pants.

Sorry, I realise this post could have been a bit insensitive.

I should have said "another's big girl/boy/genderqueer/nonbinary/trans/attack helicopter pants".

 

[nightflight]

I saw a bumper sticker one time that said "question authority". I said, "ok!"

Here I am.

 

[Ana the Ist]

The reason why I offer no color name is exactly because this is the type of answer I expect. That doesn't look peach to me, it looks like flesh tone. The fact is that peach crayons and peach hues are closer to light skin tones.

We could get more specific and say peach yellow, peach cream, sugared cream, etc., but the chosen name is subjective, the fact that flesh tone does not reflect that flesh has many tones is the problem people point out.

And??

I get that it doesn't reflect every flesh tone...I get that it's factually incorrect. I don't get what the big deal is...

Are you saying that as a black child...you looked at the flesh-tone crayon and suddenly realized that a massive institutional racism existed? You thought that you were less of a person because it wasn't your flesh tone? You wept at the cruelty inherent in humanity that was reflected by the name of a colored crayon?

Or...did it not make any difference in your life whatsoever?

 

[Gadarene]

And??

I get that it doesn't reflect every flesh tone...I get that it's factually incorrect. I don't get what the big deal is...

Are you saying that as a black child...you looked at the flesh-tone crayon and suddenly realized that a massive institutional racism existed? You thought that you were less of a person because it wasn't your flesh tone? You wept at the cruelty inherent in humanity that was reflected by the name of a colored crayon?

Or...did it not make any difference in your life whatsoever?

This reminds me of the people who say they don't feel represented because there aren't people with their gender/skin colour/whatever in the media they enjoy.

Do our similarities transcend our superficial differences, or do they not? Because I've never had a problem relating to people who aren't male, white, cis, straight, etc.

And I can only imagine the hoohah that would occur if a white guy said he couldn't identify with the experiences of a nonwhite woman because they weren't a white male.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I love that people are arguing about "the plan" or what they expect from these threads. When they don't turn out they want (i.e., someone constantly calling them a racist), they throw a fit and demand you start calling them names. Sorry that discussions of racial discrimination do not fit a cookie cutter mold.

They do fit a cookie cutter mold...that's exactly the problem. I'll lay it out for you...

It's always a discussion of white racism. Never a discussion of black, latino, or asian racism...those aren't allowed. It's always one way...blame whites for everything, never even for a moment consider personal responsibility. Never consider how personal choices might affect outcomes or personal perspective might influence your life.

It's always the perspective of whites which is to blame. Always their views....never yours.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I think this is part of the problem. You cannot address a problem if people deny its existence. One of the issues with dealing with climate change is a political faction intent on denying its existence. You can't demand someone come up with a solution to a problem you don't believe in. Part of the solution is seeing the problem in the first place.

This is also ironic...because we don't need everyone to agree on climate change to start on solutions for it. Reducing oil dependency, finding alternative energy sources, increasing the use of public transportation...all these things can happen and do happen regardless of whether or not everyone agrees on climate change. What's more the solutions are obvious...and relatable.

You wanna hear the obvious solution to people with unusual names getting jobs? Stop giving your children unusual names.

Problem solved within just a couple generations.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Even assuming this were the case (it isn't), you do realize that you've just made a case for reparations, right? The reason most Black people live in poor, violent, high-crime neighborhoods is because of the combination of redlining (ongoing to this day I might add) and the various policies that destroyed the inner city.



I think Christians are untrustworthy and that their religion leads them to lie, cheat, and steal.

What, that's not a correct representation of Christianity? Well shoot, maybe Christians should change their culture to show otherwise!

What, that's never been a correct representation of Christian culture?

Huh... Weird. Wonder how I got that impression. Well, not my problem! You have to fix it.

...Except that this analogy fails, because Christianity is incredibly powerful and influential, with tons of representation in the media and popular press and no shortage of funds and influence to fix things.

Would you have a problem telling a young black man who wants a job to lose the daishiki and put on a suit and tie? To lose the afro, dreadlocks, or corn rows...and cut a clean-cut hairstyle?

Or is that somehow racist to expect him to conform to the "norms" of the business world?

 

[Ana the Ist]

Like "Jamal".

I'm guessing you're making this point as an attempt to say that what's really going on is that the name "Jamal" signifies that the applicant is black....and that's why he's not getting an interview, correct?

Then what good does bringing this issue to light do? There's racist white people out there ...I get it. Even if you could somehow avoid his name being put on a resume...he's going to be recognized as black during the interview. At that point, the racist reason not to hire him becomes his hairstyle, his clothes, or the way he kept pronouncing "they".

It appears that the complaint is "There's racist people out there...and that isn't fair." Which is something I totally agree with and don't think there's anything we can do about.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Yep, posters here will describe that racial, ethnic and cultural discrimination is okay, but then deny its existence.

Who's saying it's ok? Who posted that?

 

[Rick Otto]

I got as far as the Band-aids and the shampoo. Before I invest time reading further, can you tell me if this is satire or serious? Is it supposed to be funny?

I am surprised you can stand thru an entire liturgy, but not read this entire article. I was reading the comments before I realized I had finished the article. I am left wondering if your post is self satire.