University of Chicago has a course called ‘The Problem of Whiteness'

[Ana the Ist]

Experienced marginalization is a better learning tool that mere conceptualization.

Sure sure...whatever you tell yourself to justify this racism.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Sure sure...whatever you tell yourself to justify this racism.

and it is weird that racists flip it around claiming to be the victims when called out.

 

[Landon Caeli]

and it is weird that racists flip it around claiming to be the victims when called out.

We're not claiming to be victims, We're just saying it, like it is.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

We're not claiming to be victims, We're just saying it, like it is.

You are identifying as a racist then?

 

[Landon Caeli]

You are identifying as a racist then?

Yes. You can consider me that if you like. But I don't consider myself as one outside this conversation.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Yes. You can consider me that if you like. But I don't consider myself as one outside this conversation.

I can respect that. In fact I have to acknowledge my own racism that I have to work against. But it is there imbedded since childhood.

 

[USincognito]

Did anyone post any content showing us exactly why this course is racist?

 

[dzheremi]

From where I'm sitting, The Ibanezer Scrooge is correct about the historical 'construction' of whiteness in an American context, and RDKirk is correct about how these terms and concepts are used and sometimes 'weaponized' today outside of their original (primarily academic) contexts. Given that, I don't know why this thread is breaking down as though you're either on the side of the course or against the course. It seems like a lot of courses are, where some of it is good information you might not learn about otherwise, while other content is ideological chickenfeed, and the two are definitely not clearly delineated as such. This is where it helps the student to have a strong internal sense of their own values and who they are, because it is rare that this kind of course will pass without something being offensive and challenging to whatever viewpoints they held before taking it. Heck, in my own experience in graduate school, I took a course on Sociolinguistics that ended up greatly offending me, due to the Jewish professor's constant mocking of Christianity and associating it with racism and colonialism. It took people from my Church, who are native African people (and at least 'brown', by American standards), to thankfully take me to task by reminding me that plenty of Christian churches have been racist and associated with colonialism (e.g., Lutheranism did not become the dominant church in the German colonial possession of Namibia by coincidence), so she's not wrong, and anyway it's not like she's saying the Coptic Orthodox Church specifically did any of that. Following their strong rebuke of my entitled whining, I apologized to the professor in question (we had had a very intense disagreement over what I had insisted to her via e-mai was a racist and completely off-topic assignment), because I realized that while she was painting with an overly broad brush in her very sophomoric criticism of Christianity, I was also in the wrong for reacting as though because she had said "Christian", she was talking about me. (cf. this course says whiteness is a problem, I'm white, therefore XYZ.)

This stuff is part of the college experience, and since it's not like college is the only time that students will ever be challenged or offended, it can at least be argued that a secondary effect of taking such as course as written about in the OP could be (perhaps unintentionally) teaching students who probably haven't been exposed to much challenging of their views how to properly handle it. Does that "excuse racism", as the OP has subsequently asked? Heck no, it doesn't. But it does provide a relatively 'safe space' (ha) to discuss aspects of racism in Americans' everyday conceptualization of the world, as well as to identify when academics are being manipulative and pushing nonsense ideas on students/society at large.

 

[public hermit]

From where I'm sitting, The Ibanezer Scrooge is correct about the historical 'construction' of whiteness in an American context, and RDKirk is correct about how these terms and concepts are used and sometimes 'weaponized' today outside of their original (primarily academic) contexts. Given that, I don't know why this thread is breaking down as though you're either on the side of the course or against the course. It seems like a lot of courses are, where some of it is good information you might not learn about otherwise, while other content is ideological chickenfeed, and the two are definitely not clearly delineated as such. This is where it helps the student to have a strong internal sense of their own values and who they are, because it is rare that this kind of course will pass without something being offensive and challenging to whatever viewpoints they held before taking it. Heck, in my own experience in graduate school, I took a course on Sociolinguistics that ended up greatly offending me, due to the Jewish professor's constant mocking of Christianity and associating it with racism and colonialism. It took people from my Church, who are native African people (and at least 'brown', by American standards), to thankfully take me to task by reminding me that plenty of Christian churches have been racist and associated with colonialism (e.g., Lutheranism did not become the dominant church in the German colonial possession of Namibia by coincidence), so she's not wrong, and anyway it's not like she's saying the Coptic Orthodox Church specifically did any of that. Following their strong rebuke of my entitled whining, I apologized to the professor in question (we had had a very intense disagreement over what I had insisted to her via e-mai was a racist and completely off-topic assignment), because I realized that while she was painting with an overly broad brush in her very sophomoric criticism of Christianity, I was also in the wrong for reacting as though because she had said "Christian", she was talking about me. (cf. this course says whiteness is a problem, I'm white, therefore XYZ.)

This stuff is part of the college experience, and since it's not like college is the only time that students will ever be challenged or offended, it can at least be argued that a secondary effect of taking such as course as written about in the OP could be (perhaps unintentionally) teaching students who probably haven't been exposed to much challenging of their views how to properly handle it. Does that "excuse racism", as the OP has subsequently asked? Heck no, it doesn't. But it does provide a relatively 'safe space' (ha) to discuss aspects of racism in Americans' everyday conceptualization of the world, as well as to identify when academics are being manipulative and pushing nonsense ideas on students/society at large.

You are bringing way too much nuance and reason into this discourse. That cannot be good.

 

[Pommer]

From where I'm sitting, The Ibanezer Scrooge is correct about the historical 'construction' of whiteness in an American context, and RDKirk is correct about how these terms and concepts are used and sometimes 'weaponized' today outside of their original (primarily academic) contexts. Given that, I don't know why this thread is breaking down as though you're either on the side of the course or against the course. It seems like a lot of courses are, where some of it is good information you might not learn about otherwise, while other content is ideological chickenfeed, and the two are definitely not clearly delineated as such. This is where it helps the student to have a strong internal sense of their own values and who they are, because it is rare that this kind of course will pass without something being offensive and challenging to whatever viewpoints they held before taking it. Heck, in my own experience in graduate school, I took a course on Sociolinguistics that ended up greatly offending me, due to the Jewish professor's constant mocking of Christianity and associating it with racism and colonialism. It took people from my Church, who are native African people (and at least 'brown', by American standards), to thankfully take me to task by reminding me that plenty of Christian churches have been racist and associated with colonialism (e.g., Lutheranism did not become the dominant church in the German colonial possession of Namibia by coincidence), so she's not wrong, and anyway it's not like she's saying the Coptic Orthodox Church specifically did any of that. Following their strong rebuke of my entitled whining, I apologized to the professor in question (we had had a very intense disagreement over what I had insisted to her via e-mai was a racist and completely off-topic assignment), because I realized that while she was painting with an overly broad brush in her very sophomoric criticism of Christianity, I was also in the wrong for reacting as though because she had said "Christian", she was talking about me. (cf. this course says whiteness is a problem, I'm white, therefore XYZ.)

This stuff is part of the college experience, and since it's not like college is the only time that students will ever be challenged or offended, it can at least be argued that a secondary effect of taking such as course as written about in the OP could be (perhaps unintentionally) teaching students who probably haven't been exposed to much challenging of their views how to properly handle it. Does that "excuse racism", as the OP has subsequently asked? Heck no, it doesn't. But it does provide a relatively 'safe space' (ha) to discuss aspects of racism in Americans' everyday conceptualization of the world, as well as to identify when academics are being manipulative and pushing nonsense ideas on students/society at large.

I think the “complaint” is really that Americans tend to be conservative and becomes less conservative with more education that challenges their brand of conservatism.

 

[Lukaris]

It seems impossible to find a syllabus on this nothing course that some shill can earn a paycheck teaching. Here is the overview of this “course”:


The Problem of Whiteness

Rebecca Journey

Mondays - Wednesdays: 01:30 PM-02:50 PM

Critical race theorists have shown that whiteness has long functioned as an "unmarked" racial category, saturating a default surround against which non-white or "not quite" others appear as aberrant. This saturation has had wide-ranging effects, coloring everything from the consolidation of wealth, power and property to the distribution of environmental health hazards. Yet in recent years, whiteness has resurfaced as a conspicuous problem within liberal political discourse. This seminar examines the problem of whiteness through an anthropological lens, drawing from classic and contemporary works of critical race theory. Attending to the ways in which various forms of social positioning and historical phenomena intersect in the formation of racial hierarchy, we will approach whiteness as a "pigment of the imagination" with worldmaking (and razing) effects.


Spring 2023 Courses


Of course, there are probably many who will say a person criticizing this mush is every fill in the blank “phobe” they can think of. Great investment of college loan money that might not be able to be paid back?

 

[Ana the Ist]

and it is weird that racists flip it around claiming to be the victims when called out.

Indeed.

 

[Ana the Ist]

From where I'm sitting, The Ibanezer Scrooge is correct about the historical 'construction' of whiteness in an American context, and RDKirk is correct about how these terms and concepts are used and sometimes 'weaponized' today outside of their original (primarily academic) contexts. Given that, I don't know why this thread is breaking down as though you're either on the side of the course or against the course. It seems like a lot of courses are, where some of it is good information you might not learn about otherwise, while other content is ideological chickenfeed, and the two are definitely not clearly delineated as such. This is where it helps the student to have a strong internal sense of their own values and who they are, because it is rare that this kind of course will pass without something being offensive and challenging to whatever viewpoints they held before taking it. Heck, in my own experience in graduate school, I took a course on Sociolinguistics that ended up greatly offending me, due to the Jewish professor's constant mocking of Christianity and associating it with racism and colonialism. It took people from my Church, who are native African people (and at least 'brown', by American standards), to thankfully take me to task by reminding me that plenty of Christian churches have been racist and associated with colonialism (e.g., Lutheranism did not become the dominant church in the German colonial possession of Namibia by coincidence), so she's not wrong, and anyway it's not like she's saying the Coptic Orthodox Church specifically did any of that. Following their strong rebuke of my entitled whining, I apologized to the professor in question (we had had a very intense disagreement over what I had insisted to her via e-mai was a racist and completely off-topic assignment), because I realized that while she was painting with an overly broad brush in her very sophomoric criticism of Christianity, I was also in the wrong for reacting as though because she had said "Christian", she was talking about me. (cf. this course says whiteness is a problem, I'm white, therefore XYZ.)

This stuff is part of the college experience, and since it's not like college is the only time that students will ever be challenged or offended, it can at least be argued that a secondary effect of taking such as course as written about in the OP could be (perhaps unintentionally) teaching students who probably haven't been exposed to much challenging of their views how to properly handle it. Does that "excuse racism", as the OP has subsequently asked? Heck no, it doesn't. But it does provide a relatively 'safe space' (ha) to discuss aspects of racism in Americans' everyday conceptualization of the world, as well as to identify when academics are being manipulative and pushing nonsense ideas on students/society at large.

No...people who don't hold these particular racist views will be challenged. There's no complementary "everything good about whiteness" course that challenges all the students who hold views similar to those presented in the course.

There's no "Hitler had some Great Ideas" course, nor any "The Problem with Blackness" course and I imagine you'd be appalled if there were. You wouldn't be defending them saying "hey, people are going to be challenged by different ideas in college".

So please, stop this pathetic defense of a racist and her racist course. She deserves all the scorn she's receiving.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I think the “complaint” is really that Americans tend to be conservative and becomes less conservative with more education that challenges their brand of conservatism.

Let's not conflate ideological demagoguery with education. Education typically involves learning something factual or useful or otherwise helpful. This is just a racist POV.

 

[dzheremi]

No...people who don't hold these particular racist views will be challenged. There's no complementary "everything good about whiteness" course that challenges all the students who hold views similar to those presented in the course.

There's no "Hitler had some Great Ideas" course, nor any "The Problem with Blackness" course and I imagine you'd be appalled if there were. You wouldn't be defending them saying "hey, people are going to be challenged by different ideas in college".

So please, stop this pathetic defense of a racist and her racist course. She deserves all the scorn she's receiving.

I'm not defending racism. I'm saying there can be good parts of an otherwise nonsense class, and that a student being offended by something isn't in itself always a sign that the class has nothing of value in it.

Since this thread is another "liberals are craaaazy" whine-fest, think about all the liberal students out there who would be offended by the way that history was taught before very recently (e.g., with no special units/sections on the contributions of LGBT people). Sure, they're offended and probably convinced that such a comparatively traditional approach is an example of LGBT-phobia, but does that mean that those of us who were taught without that content therefore didn't learn anything of value? Of course not. So the accusation of racism, homophobia, etc. may or may not be present, but the content of the course (which we can't really know outside of the course catalogue description, apparently) may prove useful anyway.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I’m down with MIracle Whip for ‘tato salad, but there was this one time a ran out of butter for grilled chase and thought to use Hellman’s mayonnaise thinking “how bad could it be?”
Better, much, much better, not only taste-wise but ease of prep!
I’m sulking because I cannot find “real” sriracha, though, of late.

Ahhh...I knew this post reminded me of something...

 

[Ana the Ist]

I'm not defending racism. I'm saying there can be good parts of an otherwise nonsense class, and that a student being offended by something isn't in itself always a sign that the class has nothing of value in it.

Depends upon whether it's interested in truth or ideology.

Since this thread is another "liberals are craaaazy" whine-fest, think about all the liberal students out there who would be offended by the way that history was taught before very recently (e.g., with no special units/sections on the contributions of LGBT people). Sure, they're offended and probably convinced that such a comparatively traditional approach is an example of LGBT-phobia, but does that mean that those of us who were taught without that content therefore didn't learn anything of value? Of course not. So the accusation of racism, homophobia, etc. may or may not be present, but the content of the course (which we can't really know outside of the course catalogue description, apparently) may prove useful anyway.

Here's Roger Scruton on fake subjects in academia.

I would suggest that since "The Problem with Whiteness" searches for no truth, and likely allows no conclusions about "Whiteness as a solution" or "The good Whiteness has Done" but rather only allows for racist drivel about white people....this is a fake subject. Full of racist ideological garbage. I pity anyone who finds anything of "value" in it.

 

[RDKirk]

I'm not defending racism. I'm saying there can be good parts of an otherwise nonsense class, and that a student being offended by something isn't in itself always a sign that the class has nothing of value in it.

Since this thread is another "liberals are craaaazy" whine-fest, think about all the liberal students out there who would be offended by the way that history was taught before very recently (e.g., with no special units/sections on the contributions of LGBT people). Sure, they're offended and probably convinced that such a comparatively traditional approach is an example of LGBT-phobia, but does that mean that those of us who were taught without that content therefore didn't learn anything of value? Of course not. So the accusation of racism, homophobia, etc. may or may not be present, but the content of the course (which we can't really know outside of the course catalogue description, apparently) may prove useful anyway.

I should think such a course would be titled, "Contributions of the LGBTQA+ Community" rather than "The Problem of Cisgenderism."

 

[FreeinChrist]

ADVISOR HAT


This thread was moved from News & Current Events to the Kitchen Sink as the News forum requires an article link in the OP. A video link is not enough​