Police Captain Suspended

[Ana the Ist]

...for "white male privilege" remark.

Female police captain suspended after saying colleague benefits from ‘white male privilege’

An Indiana police force placed a female captain on paid administrative leave after she told a fellow officer that he benefited from "white male privilege".

A vote on Captain Carri Weber's future with the Plainfield Police Department is scheduled for a commissioner's meeting on Thursday, according to WRTV.

I say good riddance, hopefully she's removed. Racism and sexism have no place in the police department.

Thoughts?

 

[Brightmoon]

The white male did the equivalent of pearl clutching and she gets in trouble . I’d say that was white male privilege right there. Men are rarely aware of the privileges they hold over women

 

[dzheremi]

Interesting.

I would think if the quoted statistic is supported by anything, it would not be hard to show the data, and the exchange would've gone quite differently. As it went, it seems like the reflexive "white guy asks a question about something = automatic white male privilege" paradigm is starting to show its age.

 

[dzheremi]

The white male did the equivalent of pearl clutching and she gets in trouble . I’d say that was white male privilege right there. Men are rarely aware of the privileges they hold over women

Wouldn't a woman have been just as able to ask that question?

And if she had, do you think she would've gotten the same answer? Particularly as the officer in instruction was herself a woman (and a white one, at that)?

 

[Brightmoon]

Hard to tell, most women are aware of having to take a back seat occasionally and it does breed resentment sometimes

 

[dzheremi]

Sure, but this particular woman was clearly not in any kind of back seat when she's up in front, teaching the lesson, responding to the question herself.

And she chose an ill-considered response and now she very well may have to face the consequences. I thought that was a pretty standard social justice principle (or, if you will, a plain justice principle, since it's not like it only applies to those who bring this social justice stuff into their workplaces, as this woman tried to do): "freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences". I don't really see any reason why this shouldn't also apply here.

I agree that the male officer was essentially being a pearl-clutcher, but who would say that this tactic hasn't worked over and over (and over!) for people espousing the very ideas that the female officer herself was trying to assert? To allude to Douglas Murray's recent book on how this sort of thing is ruining western societies, The Madness of Crowds, there comes a time when the majority simply stops seeing any compelling reason not to use the same tactics that have worked so well for others.

I'm not involved in any of this political stuff, but I worry that this may be happening.

 

[Ophiolite]

...for "white male privilege" remark.

Female police captain suspended after saying colleague benefits from ‘white male privilege’



I say good riddance, hopefully she's removed. Racism and sexism have no place in the police department.

Thoughts?

Thoughts? You seem to think that there is no truth in the notion that white males tend to enjoy certain advantages in society and that, if they are blind to these advantages, may find it difficult to appreciate some difficulties faced by non whites and non males. If that is what you think then my thought, as a white male, is that you are full of the proverbial. Stupidity and indifference have no place anywhere.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Thoughts? You seem to think that there is no truth in the notion that white males tend to enjoy certain advantages in society *snip*

It's certainly possible that people have treated me differently, at different times, sometimes to my advantage, because I'm a white person or male....

The problem here is she went from possibility...to certainty.

She doesn't know what that guy has experienced in life, she doesn't know what discrimination he has or hasn't faced. She doesn't know what difficulties he's experienced.

Instead, she jumped to racist and sexist conclusions about him based upon his skin color and gender.

There's no place for that in the police department.

 

[Ana the Ist]

The white male did the equivalent of pearl clutching and she gets in trouble . I’d say that was white male privilege right there. Men are rarely aware of the privileges they hold over women

She's teaching a class...and he asked a question about the statistics. Is there something... wrong with that?

 

[DaisyDay]

This isn't exactly current news - Captain Weber got reinstated more than two years ago.

But a letter of reprimand of the board issued to Capt. Carri Weber will be kept in her permanent file, a spokesman for Plainfield, Ind., said in a statement to The Washington Post.

Capt. Scott Arndt, the male officer, was also suspended for two days without pay for “conduct unbecoming a Plainfield Police officer,” the statement said. He served his suspension on Nov. 27 and 28, deputy town manager Tony Perona told The Post.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...reinstated-after-white-male-privilege-remark/

 

[iluvatar5150]

This isn't exactly current news - Captain Weber got reinstated more than two years ago.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...reinstated-after-white-male-privilege-remark/

Wow, that video.... That certainly doesn’t make anybody look good. The “white privilege” comment was stupid and mostly not an answer to what he was asking, but his question was itself pretty stupid and his overreaction was epic.

Amusingly, the way it was initially reported lends some post hoc credence to the claim of privilege. Lady cop makes one brief comment about privilege and gets dragged through the national media; man cop throws a hissy fit despite multiple attempts to calm things down and nobody says a thing.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Sure, but this particular woman was clearly not in any kind of back seat when she's up in front, teaching the lesson, responding to the question herself.

And she chose an ill-considered response and now she very well may have to face the consequences. I thought that was a pretty standard social justice principle (or, if you will, a plain justice principle, since it's not like it only applies to those who bring this social justice stuff into their workplaces, as this woman tried to do): "freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences". I don't really see any reason why this shouldn't also apply here.

I agree that the male officer was essentially being a pearl-clutcher, but who would say that this tactic hasn't worked over and over (and over!) for people espousing the very ideas that the female officer herself was trying to assert? To allude to Douglas Murray's recent book on how this sort of thing is ruining western societies, The Madness of Crowds, there comes a time when the majority simply stops seeing any compelling reason not to use the same tactics that have worked so well for others.

I'm not involved in any of this political stuff, but I worry that this may be happening.

The woman who made the comment was not the instructor.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Wow, that video.... That certainly doesn’t make anybody look good. The “white privilege” comment was stupid and mostly not an answer to what he was asking, but his question was itself pretty stupid and his overreaction was epic.

Amusingly, the way it was initially reported lends some post hoc credence to the claim of privilege. Lady cop makes one brief comment about privilege and gets dragged through the national media; man cop throws a hissy fit despite multiple attempts to calm things down and nobody says a thing.

That's an interesting way of looking at things...

My guess is that had the comment been directed towards a black officer, telling him he didn't understand because he is black, you wouldn't call that reaction a "hissy fit".

Would you?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

...this is one of those scenarios where it can be easy to claim "reverse sexism" "reverse racism" etc...

But, when taking into account context and some common-sense realities, it's not so clear cut.

The reality in this case is...there's truth to the statement that men are given certain advantages in regards to the police force. Some warranted, some unwarranted.

It's not untrue to say that men are given professional advantages in certain fields where the general perception is that "size and strength will make you better suited for this job".

The "Un-PC" reality, that may draw me some heat here (but I don't care lol), is that the aforementioned perception isn't entirely false. If job description is "you may need to take down a hostile, full grown man", it's not untrue to say that, statistically speaking, men may be better suited for that. There are biological differences between the sexes. Are there outliers (like Rhonda Rousey who could beat up and take down an average man)?...sure, but that's certainly not the norm. There are numerous police videos you can watch where female officers have to resort to using things like guns and tasers due to being physically outmatched, where male police officers could handle without resorting to such means.

The flip-side, there are other aspects of police work than just the physicality...some of which, aren't contingent upon biological differences that women could do just as well as men...in some case, even better. For instance, taking a statement from a female rape victim and showing compassion and building a connection in order to get info...most women would be more comfortable talking to a woman about that.


I think with this case, the real question is...if the roles were reversed, would a male police chief get the same level of discipline if they were to say something like "you've benefited from affirmative action hiring practices".

 

[iluvatar5150]

That's an interesting way of looking at things...

My guess is that had the comment been directed towards a black officer, telling him he didn't understand because he is black, you wouldn't call that reaction a "hissy fit".

Would you?

It depends on exactly what is being said that he doesn't understand.

If the claim is that the black guy can't understand, say, math just because he's black, then no, that degree of response would be warranted.

If, however, the claim is that the black guy doesn't understand what it's like to be in a racial majority and to enjoy taking a bunch of things for granted because his experience is normalized in the culture, then IMO that's a perfectly reasonable assessment to make and that response would qualify as a hissy fit.

The argument the captain was making was that this guy doesn't know what it's like to be harassed for being in a certain demographic because he's not a member of a demographic that's regularly harassed. The claim isn't about him per se - i.e. it's not saying that his capabilities or mental faculties or behaviors are somehow deficient due to his being white and male. The claim is about society and how society treats certain groups of people, which then shapes his perceptions.

It's no different than saying that, because I'm not a cop, I don't know what it's like to worry about getting shot or run over every day just for going to work. It's true; I don't. That shapes how I perceive the world.

It's not sexist or racist or whatever to point out that sexism, racism, privilege, etc exist and yes, I would argue that automatically taking that stance is absurd, whiny and often more than a little disingenuous.

That said, I still maintain that the captain's response was dumb, patronizing, and, at best, ham-fisted and probably did warrant some kind of response. Though, the original question was also pretty dumb. Who the heck challenges statistics with an anecdote about their spouse?

 

[Ana the Ist]

It depends on exactly what is being said that he doesn't understand.

We can leave it as the same thing. I'll entertain the rest of your post anyway.

If the claim is that the black guy can't understand, say, math just because he's black, then no, that degree of response would be warranted.

Right.

If, however, the claim is that the black guy doesn't understand what it's like to be in a racial majority

Lol why? Because black guys are never a racial majority? At a party? At a BBQ? Playing sports? At school? In their neighborhood?

It seems silly to imagine this. I think most people have been and know what it's like to be in the majority and minority at some point in their lives.

and to enjoy taking a bunch of things for granted because his experience is normalized in the culture,

Not sure what this means....we all have different experiences, none of them are "normalized in culture". For example, the movie Die Hard has a mostly white cast across the spectrum...and absolutely none of it is relatable to being white.

The argument the captain was making was that this guy doesn't know what it's like to be harassed for being in a certain demographic because he's not a member of a demographic that's regularly harassed. The claim isn't about him per se - i.e. it's not saying that his capabilities or mental faculties or behaviors are somehow deficient due to his being white and male. The claim is about society and how society treats certain groups of people, which then shapes his perceptions.

I think you're mistaken. The statistic he was questioning was about police violence against the trans community. I think the cop was trying to say that he, and nobody he knows, has even heard of a cop beating up a trans person so he found the stats questionable.

You see, because the statistic is about him....and the people he knows....he's entirely right to question it's validity.

It's not sexist or racist or whatever to point out that sexism, racism, privilege, etc exist

I don't think there's anything wrong with pointing out they exist....but there's a big problem with accusing someone of it when all they did was ask a question.

That said, I still maintain that the captain's response was dumb, patronizing, and, at best, ham-fisted and probably did warrant some kind of response. Though, the original question was also pretty dumb. Who the heck challenges statistics with an anecdote about their spouse?

I think he worded it poorly....though perhaps his wife is a cop as well.

 

[grasping the after wind]

...for "white male privilege" remark.

Female police captain suspended after saying colleague benefits from ‘white male privilege’



I say good riddance, hopefully she's removed. Racism and sexism have no place in the police department.

Thoughts?

As the statistic came from an LGBT advocacy group and not an objective or unbiased source I think questioning its validity is not out of the question. Playing the victim after being mildly insulted by being stereotyped is not behavior I would applaud. Just give a rejoinder and move on. The offending officer's dismissive remark might not have engendered reprisal by the powers that be had not she only recently been found to be drinking on the job.

 

[iluvatar5150]

I think he worded it poorly....though perhaps his wife is a cop as well.

Yeah, I assumed from the context that his wife was a cop, which still doesn't make his argument make much sense. The only way I can imagine his argument making sense is if his wife is trans, which I suppose is possible, though probably unlikely just by virtue of how few people are openly transgender. In the case that his wife is trans, I would still think his argument to be a poor one, but it would take less mental gymnastics to understand.

 

[grasping the after wind]

Yeah, I assumed from the context that his wife was a cop, which still doesn't make his argument make much sense. The only way I can imagine his argument making sense is if his wife is trans, which I suppose is possible, though probably unlikely just by virtue of how few people are openly transgender. In the case that his wife is trans, I would still think his argument to be a poor one, but it would take less mental gymnastics to understand.

That his argument for disbelieving the statistic is poor due to its anecdotal nature hardly matters. One should always be skeptical of statistics and ask for proof they are valid. Too many invalid statistics are thrown around for anyone to just take any random one quoted by someone as valid. Since it is an advocacy group providing the statistic I would be doubly skeptical that it is accurate. Not because of the nature of the advocacy group but simply because it is an advocacy group. Much like polls, there are ways to get results that are closer to what one wants when compiling statistics.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Yeah, I assumed from the context that his wife was a cop, which still doesn't make his argument make much sense. The only way I can imagine his argument making sense is if his wife is trans, which I suppose is possible, though probably unlikely just by virtue of how few people are openly transgender. In the case that his wife is trans, I would still think his argument to be a poor one, but it would take less mental gymnastics to understand.

Why doesn't it make sense? He's a cop. The statistic is about cops beating trans people. He's literally one half of the equation with firsthand knowledge of his actions and secondhand knowledge of many others.