Total Posts:252|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

White Privilege

EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2016 6:04:49 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
Let's discuss an increasingly controversial concept on here: white privilege.

Just mentioning those two words is normally enough to shut down any substantive dialogue in its tracks. But I implore you to keep your ears, or eyes in this case, open for just a little longer. I promise I'm not attacking you. You're beautiful. I love you.

So what is white privilege? Many people combat this idea by pointing out how a white family living in poverty can't possibly be privileged over a black family living in luxury. Many white people are indeed familiar with living in the ghettos. With enduring the winters of northern Illinois, counting coins to ensure the ability to purchase ramen noodles, or pushing laundry further and further down your to-do list because it's a luxury you can't afford, no one can say that poverty is foreign to whites. It is a middle-class, educated luxury to assume that everyone can succeed if they work hard. To the impoverished, just living day-to-day can be a life-or-death struggle.

Privilege is not purely an economic construct. It is also a social one. To many, the seriousness of white privilege waxes and wanes depending on what it's addressing. You open a model magazine and 90% of the people depicted are white. So what? Who the hell cares about that kind of white privilege when thousands of refugees fleeing from terror and oppression in the Middle East?

I believe the term privilege connotes the wrong idea. It implies that white people are inherently gifted. It places the position of being oppressed or discriminated against as the default position. This is not what privilege is about. Nor is privilege telling you to feel guilty. It is not blaming white people for anything. Maybe, as a white person living as a minority, you have experienced prejudice and discrimination. Maybe have mocked you for being white. This is entirely possible. It also does not negate the concept of white privilege.

White privilege might better be described as the absence of certain factors. When you walk into a store, you don't have to worry about a security guard following you around or asking you questions. When you move into a new neighborhood, you don't have to worry whether your neighbors wonder if you're a threat. When a cop pulls you over for speeding, you don't have to worry about the situation escalating from there. Although there are also tangible factors (you're more likely to be placed into a gifted or honors education program, you're more likely to be hired for a job, etc).

So why do so many white people today despise the idea of privilege so much? Why do they feel so angry at the concept? Why do they feel like they're being blamed no matter how many times people tell them they aren't? Why do they feel so insecure? (I use this word in a more literal sense - they don't feel their position is safe). After all, look at all the progress we've made! Look at everything we've achieved! We have a black president, for crying out loud.

This idea invokes the human (but sadly illogical) tendency to view history as having begun at the moment of our birth. True, in the last few decades, attention to minorities and minority rights have risen drastically compared to those of whites. Whites are seeing another group of people receive advantage after advantage while they receive nothing. The scoreboard looks something like 5:0 against them. What they fail to realize, however, is that this scoreboard merely depicts one inning of a game which has played out for a long, long time. A game which their side has consistently come out ahead on in every inning before this one.

The Huffington Post (no, don't stop reading now) put forth an interesting article about privilege. It advances the idea that the reason all these people are angry with the idea of privilege and the rise in better treatment of minority groups is because they perceive a loss of their own rights. They've been used to getting their way for centuries. The article likens this to an old man who once had a community pool all to himself, but once the pool opened to the public and huge crowds started coming, complained about his own right to swim in the pool.

Rather than privilege, I prefer the term intersectionality. Intersectionality realizes that people can be privileged in one way but not in another. It also acknowledges many of the different types of privileges which exist (citizens, class, sexuality, (dis)ability, etc). It doesn't connote an unfair burden placed upon whites, and it doesn't imply the assignment of guilt. However, it also recognizes that systems of oppression remain very, very real, and we still need to work together to ensure people are treated freely, fairly, and equally.

And that's my two cents on what white privilege means. What are your thoughts? What are your experiences?

Also, you're still beautiful. :-)
XLAV
Posts: 13,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2016 7:07:37 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
If you're white or you have some white blood in you, you're automatically popular and beautiful, and assumed to be rich, in my country.

I've seen this first hand from my best friend who is white and foreign. He's like a chick magnet. Girls go to him without even trying.
Diqiucun_Cunmin
Posts: 2,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2016 7:11:03 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/15/2016 7:07:37 PM, XLAV wrote:
If you're white or you have some white blood in you, you're automatically popular and beautiful, and assumed to be rich, in my country.

I've seen this first hand from my best friend who is white and foreign. He's like a chick magnet. Girls go to him without even trying.

There's one guy here who sent two CVs to a company for a job (forgot what job), one with an Anglo-Saxon name with inferior qualifications, and one with a Chinese name with superior qualifications. The former was hired.
The thing is, I hate relativism. I hate relativism more than I hate everything else, excepting, maybe, fibreglass powerboats... What it overlooks, to put it briefly and crudely, is the fixed structure of human nature. - Jerry Fodor

Don't be a stat cynic:
http://www.debate.org...

Response to conservative views on deforestation:
http://www.debate.org...

Topics I'd like to debate (not debating ATM): http://tinyurl.com...
XLAV
Posts: 13,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2016 7:13:33 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/15/2016 7:06:25 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 3/15/2016 7:01:37 PM, XLAV wrote:
I want to be white

It's good to be the king.

STOP OPPRESSING ME!

CHECK YOUR PRIVILEGE, @SSHOLE!!!
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2016 7:15:21 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/15/2016 7:11:03 PM, Diqiucun_Cunmin wrote:
At 3/15/2016 7:07:37 PM, XLAV wrote:
If you're white or you have some white blood in you, you're automatically popular and beautiful, and assumed to be rich, in my country.

I've seen this first hand from my best friend who is white and foreign. He's like a chick magnet. Girls go to him without even trying.

There's one guy here who sent two CVs to a company for a job (forgot what job), one with an Anglo-Saxon name with inferior qualifications, and one with a Chinese name with superior qualifications. The former was hired.

That's part of what I'm talking about. That happens in the States, too, unfortunately. Merit ought to be valued more.
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2016 7:16:10 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/15/2016 7:13:33 PM, XLAV wrote:
At 3/15/2016 7:06:25 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 3/15/2016 7:01:37 PM, XLAV wrote:
I want to be white

It's good to be the king.

STOP OPPRESSING ME!

CHECK YOUR PRIVILEGE, @SSHOLE!!!

I can oppress if I want to.
I can oppress your friends tonight.
Cause your friends ain't white and if they ain't white well, they're no friends of mine.
lamerde
Posts: 1,416
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2016 7:42:27 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/15/2016 6:04:49 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:

Rather than privilege, I prefer the term intersectionality. Intersectionality realizes that people can be privileged in one way but not in another. It also acknowledges many of the different types of privileges which exist (citizens, class, sexuality, (dis)ability, etc). It doesn't connote an unfair burden placed upon whites, and it doesn't imply the assignment of guilt. However, it also recognizes that systems of oppression remain very, very real, and we still need to work together to ensure people are treated freely, fairly, and equally.

And that's my two cents on what white privilege means. What are your thoughts? What are your experiences?

Also, you're still beautiful. :-)

First of all, really great post *tips hat off to you*.

I also use the term "intersection" but even that is problematic for some people because the imagery implies that two (or more things) are separate and then converge at a single point (whereas "confluence" suggests the two or more identities are merged together). No matter what language we use, I think the point is kind of the same.

I use the term privilege because it makes sense from my perspective. For decades, marginalized people have been studied from a deficit-based perspective - when you define white as the norm, anyone else is a deviation and usually, by definition, black people just don't "measure up" in a lot of ways. It's taken a lot of unlearning to recentre my language to be reflective of me as my centre. So I care less how other people feel about the word privilege and more about describing the phenomenon that holds true for many people.
Why I ignore YYW:
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
Calling someone a bitch multiple times while claiming you're taking the high road is an art form, I suppose: http://www.debate.org...
Fly
Posts: 2,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2016 11:38:33 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
White privilege is the concept that our society is centered around white people. Advantaged white people are made uncomfortable by the thought that the deck might be inherently (perhaps unfairly?) stacked in their favor, while disadvantaged white people downright resent the concept because they perceive no social advantage of any kind.

Generally speaking, racial discussions make most white people uncomfortable if not defensive. Why is that? Well, because white people are rarely ever made to feel conscious of their race, whereas people of color are quite conscious of theirs.

The term is intended to raise awareness not guilt. If the concept makes you uncomfortable, why is that? If it does, be aware that not everything is about making you comfortable. Finally, realize the irony of that.
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
Romaniii
Posts: 421
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2016 12:24:47 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/15/2016 7:42:27 PM, lamerde wrote:

I use the term privilege because it makes sense from my perspective. For decades, marginalized people have been studied from a deficit-based perspective - when you define white as the norm, anyone else is a deviation and usually, by definition, black people just don't "measure up" in a lot of ways. It's taken a lot of unlearning to recentre my language to be reflective of me as my centre. So I care less how other people feel about the word privilege and more about describing the phenomenon that holds true for many people.

That's all fine and good, but what constructive end is achieved by framing the issue that way? Thinking of racial discrimination through the lens of "privilege" and "oppression" does absolutely nothing except generate an 'us vs. them' mentality on both sides. Those terms undeniably carry negative connotations along with them -- the only purpose they serve is to antagonize non-minorities.

At best, it accomplishes nothing. At worst, it's counter-productive to the goal of mitigating racial discrimination (by inciting backlash among non-minorities, and creating a self-perpetuating victimhood complex among minorities).

Moreover, merely "describing" and "raising awareness" of racial discrimination doesn't really do anything to solve it. The people who are most receptive to such messages are probably not the ones who are responsible for the most detrimental acts of discrimination. Actual racists don't give a sh!t about your activism. If you want people to stop being racist, then try to understand *why* they're racist, and approach the issue from that direction, rather than just sitting around and coming up with ineffective ways of describing the issue.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,927
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2016 12:50:28 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/16/2016 12:24:47 AM, Romaniii wrote:
At 3/15/2016 7:42:27 PM, lamerde wrote:

I use the term privilege because it makes sense from my perspective. For decades, marginalized people have been studied from a deficit-based perspective - when you define white as the norm, anyone else is a deviation and usually, by definition, black people just don't "measure up" in a lot of ways. It's taken a lot of unlearning to recentre my language to be reflective of me as my centre. So I care less how other people feel about the word privilege and more about describing the phenomenon that holds true for many people.

That's all fine and good, but what constructive end is achieved by framing the issue that way?

You mean besides accuracy?

Thinking of racial discrimination through the lens of "privilege" and "oppression" does absolutely nothing except generate an 'us vs. them' mentality on both sides.

I struggle to find other terms that accurately describe systemic racism. Can you suggest some?

Those terms undeniably carry negative connotations along with them -- the only purpose they serve is to antagonize non-minorities.


At best, it accomplishes nothing. At worst, it's counter-productive to the goal of mitigating racial discrimination (by inciting backlash among non-minorities, and creating a self-perpetuating victimhood complex among minorities).


"And this leads me to say something about another discussion that we hear a great deal, and that is the so-called "white backlash". I would like to honestly say to you that the white backlash is merely a new name for an old phenomenon. It's not something that just came into being because of shouts of Black Power, or because Negroes engaged in riots in Watts, for instance. The fact is that the state of California voted a Fair Housing bill out of existence before anybody shouted Black Power, or before anybody rioted in Watts."

MLK Jr

Moreover, merely "describing" and "raising awareness" of racial discrimination doesn't really do anything to solve it. The people who are most receptive to such messages are probably not the ones who are responsible for the most detrimental acts of discrimination. Actual racists don't give a sh!t about your activism. If you want people to stop being racist, then try to understand *why* they're racist, and approach the issue from that direction, rather than just sitting around and coming up with ineffective ways of describing the issue.

"It may be true that the law cannot make a man love me, but it can keep him from lynching me, and I think that"s pretty important."

-- Mlk Jr

Isn't that the case with every social and equity movement? The "actual" opponents don't give a sh!t about the "activism" of the other side. They are unlikely to change their minds. But however, the the equity movement can influence the social millieu and laws...that's pretty significant.
If they make not change "actual racists" minds but it may prevent them from discriminating against me in stuff that matters - jobs, education, healthcare, housing, banking, etc.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2016 1:36:28 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/15/2016 11:38:33 PM, Fly wrote:
White privilege is the concept that our society is centered around white people. Advantaged white people are made uncomfortable by the thought that the deck might be inherently (perhaps unfairly?) stacked in their favor, while disadvantaged white people downright resent the concept because they perceive no social advantage of any kind.

Generally speaking, racial discussions make most white people uncomfortable if not defensive. Why is that? Well, because white people are rarely ever made to feel conscious of their race, whereas people of color are quite conscious of theirs.

The term is intended to raise awareness not guilt. If the concept makes you uncomfortable, why is that? If it does, be aware that not everything is about making you comfortable. Finally, realize the irony of that.

This is a lot like saying "the pure of heart don't need lawyers" and "If you are not breaking the law, you have nothing to hide".

The polite version of a critique on the concept of "white privilege" is "Hey, look, a group of people didn't garner enough attention to make a negative stereotype".

No, its not all about making me 'comfortable', but the very concept is designed to make one feel uncomfortable; the social justice equivalent of gas lighting.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2016 2:11:25 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/15/2016 7:42:27 PM, lamerde wrote:
At 3/15/2016 6:04:49 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:

Rather than privilege, I prefer the term intersectionality. Intersectionality realizes that people can be privileged in one way but not in another. It also acknowledges many of the different types of privileges which exist (citizens, class, sexuality, (dis)ability, etc). It doesn't connote an unfair burden placed upon whites, and it doesn't imply the assignment of guilt. However, it also recognizes that systems of oppression remain very, very real, and we still need to work together to ensure people are treated freely, fairly, and equally.

And that's my two cents on what white privilege means. What are your thoughts? What are your experiences?

Also, you're still beautiful. :-)

First of all, really great post *tips hat off to you*.

Thank you.

I also use the term "intersection" but even that is problematic for some people because the imagery implies that two (or more things) are separate and then converge at a single point (whereas "confluence" suggests the two or more identities are merged together). No matter what language we use, I think the point is kind of the same.

I use the term privilege because it makes sense from my perspective. For decades, marginalized people have been studied from a deficit-based perspective - when you define white as the norm, anyone else is a deviation and usually, by definition, black people just don't "measure up" in a lot of ways. It's taken a lot of unlearning to recentre my language to be reflective of me as my centre. So I care less how other people feel about the word privilege and more about describing the phenomenon that holds true for many people.

I find the term to be too antagonistic. It shuts down discussion. If people refuse to listen to your message, you're just screaming into empty space. I also don't believe "disadvantaged" should ever be the default position.
Romaniii
Posts: 421
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2016 2:16:20 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/16/2016 12:50:28 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 3/16/2016 12:24:47 AM, Romaniii wrote:

That's all fine and good, but what constructive end is achieved by framing the issue that way?

You mean besides accuracy?

I have no interest in debating the accuracy of those terms. I'm sure you can play semantics and somehow justify their usage, but I don't have the patience for that. I'm much more interested in the practical consequences of their usage.


Thinking of racial discrimination through the lens of "privilege" and "oppression" does absolutely nothing except generate an 'us vs. them' mentality on both sides.

I struggle to find other terms that accurately describe systemic racism. Can you suggest some?

"Systemic racism" works pretty well, I'd say.


Those terms undeniably carry negative connotations along with them -- the only purpose they serve is to antagonize non-minorities.

At best, it accomplishes nothing. At worst, it's counter-productive to the goal of mitigating racial discrimination (by inciting backlash among non-minorities, and creating a self-perpetuating victimhood complex among minorities).

Moreover, merely "describing" and "raising awareness" of racial discrimination doesn't really do anything to solve it. The people who are most receptive to such messages are probably not the ones who are responsible for the most detrimental acts of discrimination. Actual racists don't give a sh!t about your activism. If you want people to stop being racist, then try to understand *why* they're racist, and approach the issue from that direction, rather than just sitting around and coming up with ineffective ways of describing the issue.

"It may be true that the law cannot make a man love me, but it can keep him from lynching me, and I think that"s pretty important."

-- Mlk Jr

Isn't that the case with every social and equity movement? The "actual" opponents don't give a sh!t about the "activism" of the other side. They are unlikely to change their minds. But however, the the equity movement can influence the social millieu and laws...that's pretty significant.
If they make not change "actual racists" minds but it may prevent them from discriminating against me in stuff that matters - jobs, education, healthcare, housing, banking, etc.

This is the first time I've heard an SJW imply that they're actually pursuing tangible policy measures... all the talk of inconsequential things like "microaggressions" and "checking privilege" led me to believe otherwise.

Can I see some examples of the sort of policies you advocate?
someloser
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2016 2:30:01 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/16/2016 12:24:47 AM, Romaniii wrote:
Thinking of racial discrimination through the lens of "privilege" and "oppression" does absolutely nothing except generate an 'us vs. them' mentality on both sides.

The "us vs. them" mentality exists either way. It doesn't make the privilege/oppression view any less accurate than it is otherwise.
Ego sum qui sum. Deus lo vult.

"America is ungovernable; those who served the revolution have plowed the sea." - Simon Bolivar

"A healthy nation is as unconscious of its nationality as a healthy man of his bones. But if you break a nation's nationality it will think of nothing else but getting it set again." - George Bernard Shaw
Fly
Posts: 2,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2016 5:06:35 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/16/2016 1:36:28 AM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 3/15/2016 11:38:33 PM, Fly wrote:
White privilege is the concept that our society is centered around white people. Advantaged white people are made uncomfortable by the thought that the deck might be inherently (perhaps unfairly?) stacked in their favor, while disadvantaged white people downright resent the concept because they perceive no social advantage of any kind.

Generally speaking, racial discussions make most white people uncomfortable if not defensive. Why is that? Well, because white people are rarely ever made to feel conscious of their race, whereas people of color are quite conscious of theirs.

The term is intended to raise awareness not guilt. If the concept makes you uncomfortable, why is that? If it does, be aware that not everything is about making you comfortable. Finally, realize the irony of that.

This is a lot like saying "the pure of heart don't need lawyers" and "If you are not breaking the law, you have nothing to hide".

The polite version of a critique on the concept of "white privilege" is "Hey, look, a group of people didn't garner enough attention to make a negative stereotype".

No, its not all about making me 'comfortable', but the very concept is designed to make one feel uncomfortable; the social justice equivalent of gas lighting.

Is it the wording of the phrase or the concept itself which you find unnecessarily off-putting?
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
Romaniii
Posts: 421
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2016 5:55:59 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/16/2016 2:30:01 AM, someloser wrote:
At 3/16/2016 12:24:47 AM, Romaniii wrote:
Thinking of racial discrimination through the lens of "privilege" and "oppression" does absolutely nothing except generate an 'us vs. them' mentality on both sides.

The "us vs. them" mentality exists either way. It doesn't make the privilege/oppression view any less accurate than it is otherwise.

I'm not talking about "accuracy" here (although I do think that if we're using the colloquial definitions of those terms, they don't really fit). I'm talking about practical consequences. Regardless of whether or not SJWs are honest enough to admit it, using terms like "privilege" and "oppression" makes white males feel like they're being antagonized, and that's completely counter-productive, considering that the goal is to get popular support for the SJW cause.
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2016 11:21:13 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/16/2016 5:06:35 AM, Fly wrote:
At 3/16/2016 1:36:28 AM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 3/15/2016 11:38:33 PM, Fly wrote:
White privilege is the concept that our society is centered around white people. Advantaged white people are made uncomfortable by the thought that the deck might be inherently (perhaps unfairly?) stacked in their favor, while disadvantaged white people downright resent the concept because they perceive no social advantage of any kind.

Generally speaking, racial discussions make most white people uncomfortable if not defensive. Why is that? Well, because white people are rarely ever made to feel conscious of their race, whereas people of color are quite conscious of theirs.

The term is intended to raise awareness not guilt. If the concept makes you uncomfortable, why is that? If it does, be aware that not everything is about making you comfortable. Finally, realize the irony of that.

This is a lot like saying "the pure of heart don't need lawyers" and "If you are not breaking the law, you have nothing to hide".

The polite version of a critique on the concept of "white privilege" is "Hey, look, a group of people didn't garner enough attention to make a negative stereotype".

No, its not all about making me 'comfortable', but the very concept is designed to make one feel uncomfortable; the social justice equivalent of gas lighting.

Is it the wording of the phrase or the concept itself which you find unnecessarily off-putting?

The wording is... well, humorous. But I find the concept itself to be a positive of something intending to be used as a negative. How does one acquire privilege in this instance, and what is that bad?
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
Fly
Posts: 2,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2016 2:17:34 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/16/2016 11:21:13 AM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 3/16/2016 5:06:35 AM, Fly wrote:
At 3/16/2016 1:36:28 AM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 3/15/2016 11:38:33 PM, Fly wrote:
White privilege is the concept that our society is centered around white people. Advantaged white people are made uncomfortable by the thought that the deck might be inherently (perhaps unfairly?) stacked in their favor, while disadvantaged white people downright resent the concept because they perceive no social advantage of any kind.

Generally speaking, racial discussions make most white people uncomfortable if not defensive. Why is that? Well, because white people are rarely ever made to feel conscious of their race, whereas people of color are quite conscious of theirs.

The term is intended to raise awareness not guilt. If the concept makes you uncomfortable, why is that? If it does, be aware that not everything is about making you comfortable. Finally, realize the irony of that.

This is a lot like saying "the pure of heart don't need lawyers" and "If you are not breaking the law, you have nothing to hide".

The polite version of a critique on the concept of "white privilege" is "Hey, look, a group of people didn't garner enough attention to make a negative stereotype".

No, its not all about making me 'comfortable', but the very concept is designed to make one feel uncomfortable; the social justice equivalent of gas lighting.

Is it the wording of the phrase or the concept itself which you find unnecessarily off-putting?

The wording is... well, humorous. But I find the concept itself to be a positive of something intending to be used as a negative. How does one acquire privilege in this instance, and what is that bad?

The label is easily changeable; the concept itself is a bit more concrete. It just means that our society is tailor made for the white race. Again, if you are white, very little about society makes you self conscious about your race. It can be anything from how one is treated by law enforcement, to how often one's neighborhood garbage is collected, to how well one's race is portrayed on the nightly news.

I would think that women in the armed services could well relate-- when more and more aspects of military service opened up to women, especially Navy ships, it became uncomfortably obvious to women that the services have been geared towards accommodating the needs of the male gender.

Even if the term disappeared entirely, the reality of the situation would still be there whether you realize it or not-- it is "the way things are." And people of color would just be referencing that reality behind your back instead ; )
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2016 2:41:40 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/16/2016 2:17:34 PM, Fly wrote:
At 3/16/2016 11:21:13 AM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 3/16/2016 5:06:35 AM, Fly wrote:
At 3/16/2016 1:36:28 AM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 3/15/2016 11:38:33 PM, Fly wrote:
White privilege is the concept that our society is centered around white people. Advantaged white people are made uncomfortable by the thought that the deck might be inherently (perhaps unfairly?) stacked in their favor, while disadvantaged white people downright resent the concept because they perceive no social advantage of any kind.

Generally speaking, racial discussions make most white people uncomfortable if not defensive. Why is that? Well, because white people are rarely ever made to feel conscious of their race, whereas people of color are quite conscious of theirs.

The term is intended to raise awareness not guilt. If the concept makes you uncomfortable, why is that? If it does, be aware that not everything is about making you comfortable. Finally, realize the irony of that.

This is a lot like saying "the pure of heart don't need lawyers" and "If you are not breaking the law, you have nothing to hide".

The polite version of a critique on the concept of "white privilege" is "Hey, look, a group of people didn't garner enough attention to make a negative stereotype".

No, its not all about making me 'comfortable', but the very concept is designed to make one feel uncomfortable; the social justice equivalent of gas lighting.

Is it the wording of the phrase or the concept itself which you find unnecessarily off-putting?

The wording is... well, humorous. But I find the concept itself to be a positive of something intending to be used as a negative. How does one acquire privilege in this instance, and what is that bad?

The label is easily changeable; the concept itself is a bit more concrete. It just means that our society is tailor made for the white race. Again, if you are white, very little about society makes you self conscious about your race. It can be anything from how one is treated by law enforcement,

Attitude reflects a lot of that. Be honest, whom would you rather confront: some one wanting to get through the ordeal and move on with life, or some one with a chip on their shoulder for a perceived slight?

to how often one's neighborhood garbage is collected,

Give me a neighborhood, and I bit I could formulate a few reasons why it gets skipped.

to how well one's race is portrayed on the nightly news.

Wanna know the easiest way to stay out of the news? ;)


I would think that women in the armed services could well relate-- when more and more aspects of military service opened up to women, especially Navy ships, it became uncomfortably obvious to women that the services have been geared towards accommodating the needs of the male gender.

... because they literally were. Women weren't allowed in combat roles. There is still a controversy as to what roles woman can/should fill regarding matters of ability.

Even if the term disappeared entirely, the reality of the situation would still be there whether you realize it or not-- it is "the way things are." And people of color would just be referencing that reality behind your back instead ; )

And what reality is that? You still haven't answered "how" it persists. Its going to take a lot of racism to keep that particular house of cards upright.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
Fly
Posts: 2,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2016 3:07:51 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/16/2016 2:41:40 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 3/16/2016 2:17:34 PM, Fly wrote:
At 3/16/2016 11:21:13 AM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 3/16/2016 5:06:35 AM, Fly wrote:
At 3/16/2016 1:36:28 AM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 3/15/2016 11:38:33 PM, Fly wrote:
White privilege is the concept that our society is centered around white people. Advantaged white people are made uncomfortable by the thought that the deck might be inherently (perhaps unfairly?) stacked in their favor, while disadvantaged white people downright resent the concept because they perceive no social advantage of any kind.

Generally speaking, racial discussions make most white people uncomfortable if not defensive. Why is that? Well, because white people are rarely ever made to feel conscious of their race, whereas people of color are quite conscious of theirs.

The term is intended to raise awareness not guilt. If the concept makes you uncomfortable, why is that? If it does, be aware that not everything is about making you comfortable. Finally, realize the irony of that.

This is a lot like saying "the pure of heart don't need lawyers" and "If you are not breaking the law, you have nothing to hide".

The polite version of a critique on the concept of "white privilege" is "Hey, look, a group of people didn't garner enough attention to make a negative stereotype".

No, its not all about making me 'comfortable', but the very concept is designed to make one feel uncomfortable; the social justice equivalent of gas lighting.

Is it the wording of the phrase or the concept itself which you find unnecessarily off-putting?

The wording is... well, humorous. But I find the concept itself to be a positive of something intending to be used as a negative. How does one acquire privilege in this instance, and what is that bad?

The label is easily changeable; the concept itself is a bit more concrete. It just means that our society is tailor made for the white race. Again, if you are white, very little about society makes you self conscious about your race. It can be anything from how one is treated by law enforcement,

Attitude reflects a lot of that. Be honest, whom would you rather confront: some one wanting to get through the ordeal and move on with life, or some one with a chip on their shoulder for a perceived slight?

to how often one's neighborhood garbage is collected,

Give me a neighborhood, and I bit I could formulate a few reasons why it gets skipped.

to how well one's race is portrayed on the nightly news.

Wanna know the easiest way to stay out of the news? ;)


In other words, you choose to remain oblivious to what is reality for minorities. It is no skin off your back to do so. That is your privilege (I tease, yes)...

I would think that women in the armed services could well relate-- when more and more aspects of military service opened up to women, especially Navy ships, it became uncomfortably obvious to women that the services have been geared towards accommodating the needs of the male gender.

... because they literally were. Women weren't allowed in combat roles. There is still a controversy as to what roles woman can/should fill regarding matters of ability.

You're really missing the point here. You think that the same hasn't been true for black people regarding military service through the decades/centuries?

Even if the term disappeared entirely, the reality of the situation would still be there whether you realize it or not-- it is "the way things are." And people of color would just be referencing that reality behind your back instead ; )

And what reality is that? You still haven't answered "how" it persists. Its going to take a lot of racism to keep that particular house of cards upright.

Yes, I have; you just choose to miss the point/put an unreasonable burden of proof on it. Again, you have no penalty for ignorance on this and a lack of discomfort to gain from that ignorance. The motivations to remain blissfully ignorant are obvious. You should also note that I have not made a case for "a lot of racism" here.

What example(s) do you need to see in order to acknowledge reality on this "inconvenient truth"?
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2016 3:19:26 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
White privilege is the concept that our society is centered around white people. Advantaged white people are made uncomfortable by the thought that the deck might be inherently (perhaps unfairly?) stacked in their favor, while disadvantaged white people downright resent the concept because they perceive no social advantage of any kind.

Generally speaking, racial discussions make most white people uncomfortable if not defensive. Why is that? Well, because white people are rarely ever made to feel conscious of their race, whereas people of color are quite conscious of theirs.

The term is intended to raise awareness not guilt. If the concept makes you uncomfortable, why is that? If it does, be aware that not everything is about making you comfortable. Finally, realize the irony of that.

This is a lot like saying "the pure of heart don't need lawyers" and "If you are not breaking the law, you have nothing to hide".

The polite version of a critique on the concept of "white privilege" is "Hey, look, a group of people didn't garner enough attention to make a negative stereotype".

No, its not all about making me 'comfortable', but the very concept is designed to make one feel uncomfortable; the social justice equivalent of gas lighting.

Is it the wording of the phrase or the concept itself which you find unnecessarily off-putting?

The wording is... well, humorous. But I find the concept itself to be a positive of something intending to be used as a negative. How does one acquire privilege in this instance, and what is that bad?

The label is easily changeable; the concept itself is a bit more concrete. It just means that our society is tailor made for the white race. Again, if you are white, very little about society makes you self conscious about your race. It can be anything from how one is treated by law enforcement,

Attitude reflects a lot of that. Be honest, whom would you rather confront: some one wanting to get through the ordeal and move on with life, or some one with a chip on their shoulder for a perceived slight?

to how often one's neighborhood garbage is collected,

Give me a neighborhood, and I bit I could formulate a few reasons why it gets skipped.

to how well one's race is portrayed on the nightly news.

Wanna know the easiest way to stay out of the news? ;)


In other words, you choose to remain oblivious to what is reality for minorities. It is no skin off your back to do so. That is your privilege (I tease, yes)...

Do you genuinely feel its difficult to deal with police and stay out of the news?

I would think that women in the armed services could well relate-- when more and more aspects of military service opened up to women, especially Navy ships, it became uncomfortably obvious to women that the services have been geared towards accommodating the needs of the male gender.

... because they literally were. Women weren't allowed in combat roles. There is still a controversy as to what roles woman can/should fill regarding matters of ability.

You're really missing the point here. You think that the same hasn't been true for black people regarding military service through the decades/centuries?

How far back would you like for minorities to claim aggrieved status in society today? Where will the cut off be?

Even if the term disappeared entirely, the reality of the situation would still be there whether you realize it or not-- it is "the way things are." And people of color would just be referencing that reality behind your back instead ; )

And what reality is that? You still haven't answered "how" it persists. Its going to take a lot of racism to keep that particular house of cards upright.

Yes, I have; you just choose to miss the point/put an unreasonable burden of proof on it. Again, you have no penalty for ignorance on this and a lack of discomfort to gain from that ignorance. The motivations to remain blissfully ignorant are obvious. You should also note that I have not made a case for "a lot of racism" here.

What the eff do you think labeling something "white privilege" is? The concept in of itself is racist by label!

What example(s) do you need to see in order to acknowledge reality on this "inconvenient truth"?

That a privilege is some how taken when its not given. That is how a privilege works: you did something to earn it. A right is not earned: its gratis. A privilege (much like an entitlement) indicates you have done something (or will do something) for that benefit.

Now, quid pro quo, what examples do you need to see in order to acknowledge that "white privilege" is a mischaracterization of stereotype?
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
Fly
Posts: 2,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2016 3:41:38 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/16/2016 3:19:26 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
White privilege is the concept that our society is centered around white people. Advantaged white people are made uncomfortable by the thought that the deck might be inherently (perhaps unfairly?) stacked in their favor, while disadvantaged white people downright resent the concept because they perceive no social advantage of any kind.

Generally speaking, racial discussions make most white people uncomfortable if not defensive. Why is that? Well, because white people are rarely ever made to feel conscious of their race, whereas people of color are quite conscious of theirs.

The term is intended to raise awareness not guilt. If the concept makes you uncomfortable, why is that? If it does, be aware that not everything is about making you comfortable. Finally, realize the irony of that.

This is a lot like saying "the pure of heart don't need lawyers" and "If you are not breaking the law, you have nothing to hide".

The polite version of a critique on the concept of "white privilege" is "Hey, look, a group of people didn't garner enough attention to make a negative stereotype".

No, its not all about making me 'comfortable', but the very concept is designed to make one feel uncomfortable; the social justice equivalent of gas lighting.

Is it the wording of the phrase or the concept itself which you find unnecessarily off-putting?

The wording is... well, humorous. But I find the concept itself to be a positive of something intending to be used as a negative. How does one acquire privilege in this instance, and what is that bad?

The label is easily changeable; the concept itself is a bit more concrete. It just means that our society is tailor made for the white race. Again, if you are white, very little about society makes you self conscious about your race. It can be anything from how one is treated by law enforcement,

Attitude reflects a lot of that. Be honest, whom would you rather confront: some one wanting to get through the ordeal and move on with life, or some one with a chip on their shoulder for a perceived slight?

to how often one's neighborhood garbage is collected,

Give me a neighborhood, and I bit I could formulate a few reasons why it gets skipped.

to how well one's race is portrayed on the nightly news.

Wanna know the easiest way to stay out of the news? ;)


In other words, you choose to remain oblivious to what is reality for minorities. It is no skin off your back to do so. That is your privilege (I tease, yes)...

Do you genuinely feel its difficult to deal with police and stay out of the news?

As a white person in a white society, it is not difficult for me. Put me in a society that doesn't cater to my race, and the reality could very well be different.

As for the news reference, you misunderstand my point-- that the news makes a big deal out of murders and kidnappings of white women and kids, but not black; that the news seems to go out of its way to show interviews with low class/uneducated black people when they do get airtime.

I would think that women in the armed services could well relate-- when more and more aspects of military service opened up to women, especially Navy ships, it became uncomfortably obvious to women that the services have been geared towards accommodating the needs of the male gender.

... because they literally were. Women weren't allowed in combat roles. There is still a controversy as to what roles woman can/should fill regarding matters of ability.

You're really missing the point here. You think that the same hasn't been true for black people regarding military service through the decades/centuries?

How far back would you like for minorities to claim aggrieved status in society today? Where will the cut off be?

Are you missing my point on purpose, or... ?

Even if the term disappeared entirely, the reality of the situation would still be there whether you realize it or not-- it is "the way things are." And people of color would just be referencing that reality behind your back instead ; )

And what reality is that? You still haven't answered "how" it persists. Its going to take a lot of racism to keep that particular house of cards upright.

Yes, I have; you just choose to miss the point/put an unreasonable burden of proof on it. Again, you have no penalty for ignorance on this and a lack of discomfort to gain from that ignorance. The motivations to remain blissfully ignorant are obvious. You should also note that I have not made a case for "a lot of racism" here.

What the eff do you think labeling something "white privilege" is? The concept in of itself is racist by label!

Then change the label! Now, you are missing the point of the entire thread, which is how this label obstructs understanding and how best to change the label.

What example(s) do you need to see in order to acknowledge reality on this "inconvenient truth"?

That a privilege is some how taken when its not given. That is how a privilege works: you did something to earn it. A right is not earned: its gratis. A privilege (much like an entitlement) indicates you have done something (or will do something) for that benefit.

It is a de facto birthright. Does that work for you?

Now, quid pro quo, what examples do you need to see in order to acknowledge that "white privilege" is a mischaracterization of stereotype?

I need you to expound upon what "mischaracterization of stereotype" is, and how it relates to this particular issue.
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
lamerde
Posts: 1,416
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2016 3:59:56 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
I've yet to see a real argument against the use of the word "privilege" except that it makes white people feel bad/guilty. There's nothing inherently wrong with the term and there's nothing about the definition of the word in academia or otherwise that would suggest it's offensive. What boggles my mind is the same people will turn around and decry political correctness and cry about restricting free speech, while complaining about what should be an innocuous word.

It's the epitome of egocentrism to hear a word like "privilege" and assume it's a personal attack.
Why I ignore YYW:
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
Calling someone a bitch multiple times while claiming you're taking the high road is an art form, I suppose: http://www.debate.org...
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2016 4:03:16 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
White privilege is the concept that our society is centered around white people. Advantaged white people are made uncomfortable by the thought that the deck might be inherently (perhaps unfairly?) stacked in their favor, while disadvantaged white people downright resent the concept because they perceive no social advantage of any kind.

Generally speaking, racial discussions make most white people uncomfortable if not defensive. Why is that? Well, because white people are rarely ever made to feel conscious of their race, whereas people of color are quite conscious of theirs.

The term is intended to raise awareness not guilt. If the concept makes you uncomfortable, why is that? If it does, be aware that not everything is about making you comfortable. Finally, realize the irony of that.

This is a lot like saying "the pure of heart don't need lawyers" and "If you are not breaking the law, you have nothing to hide".

The polite version of a critique on the concept of "white privilege" is "Hey, look, a group of people didn't garner enough attention to make a negative stereotype".

No, its not all about making me 'comfortable', but the very concept is designed to make one feel uncomfortable; the social justice equivalent of gas lighting.

Is it the wording of the phrase or the concept itself which you find unnecessarily off-putting?

The wording is... well, humorous. But I find the concept itself to be a positive of something intending to be used as a negative. How does one acquire privilege in this instance, and what is that bad?

The label is easily changeable; the concept itself is a bit more concrete. It just means that our society is tailor made for the white race. Again, if you are white, very little about society makes you self conscious about your race. It can be anything from how one is treated by law enforcement,

Attitude reflects a lot of that. Be honest, whom would you rather confront: some one wanting to get through the ordeal and move on with life, or some one with a chip on their shoulder for a perceived slight?

to how often one's neighborhood garbage is collected,

Give me a neighborhood, and I bit I could formulate a few reasons why it gets skipped.

to how well one's race is portrayed on the nightly news.

Wanna know the easiest way to stay out of the news? ;)


In other words, you choose to remain oblivious to what is reality for minorities. It is no skin off your back to do so. That is your privilege (I tease, yes)...

Do you genuinely feel its difficult to deal with police and stay out of the news?

As a white person in a white society, it is not difficult for me. Put me in a society that doesn't cater to my race, and the reality could very well be different.

As for the news reference, you misunderstand my point-- that the news makes a big deal out of murders and kidnappings of white women and kids, but not black; that the news seems to go out of its way to show interviews with low class/uneducated black people when they do get airtime.

Because typically that is where crime occurs? They be climbing in your windows, snatching yo' people up... what good would it have been to interview Will Smith on the matter?


I would think that women in the armed services could well relate-- when more and more aspects of military service opened up to women, especially Navy ships, it became uncomfortably obvious to women that the services have been geared towards accommodating the needs of the male gender.

... because they literally were. Women weren't allowed in combat roles. There is still a controversy as to what roles woman can/should fill regarding matters of ability.

You're really missing the point here. You think that the same hasn't been true for black people regarding military service through the decades/centuries?

How far back would you like for minorities to claim aggrieved status in society today? Where will the cut off be?

Are you missing my point on purpose, or... ?

Society was built for whites, by whites. How long until it wasn't/isn't? I get your point, I am just asking you to propose a solution, or at the very least a time table for assuming responsibility.

Even if the term disappeared entirely, the reality of the situation would still be there whether you realize it or not-- it is "the way things are." And people of color would just be referencing that reality behind your back instead ; )

And what reality is that? You still haven't answered "how" it persists. Its going to take a lot of racism to keep that particular house of cards upright.

Yes, I have; you just choose to miss the point/put an unreasonable burden of proof on it. Again, you have no penalty for ignorance on this and a lack of discomfort to gain from that ignorance. The motivations to remain blissfully ignorant are obvious. You should also note that I have not made a case for "a lot of racism" here.

What the eff do you think labeling something "white privilege" is? The concept in of itself is racist by label!

Then change the label! Now, you are missing the point of the entire thread, which is how this label obstructs understanding and how best to change the label.

Even though it will still be pertaining to specifically whites are impressionably advantaged due to... reasons. But its still not racist.

What example(s) do you need to see in order to acknowledge reality on this "inconvenient truth"?

That a privilege is some how taken when its not given. That is how a privilege works: you did something to earn it. A right is not earned: its gratis. A privilege (much like an entitlement) indicates you have done something (or will do something) for that benefit.

It is a de facto birthright. Does that work for you?

Its a birth right, but its not enforceable. How can you call it any kind of "right" in your explanation when I can't arbitrarily declare my whiteness and get away with something. No cop is going to be intent on me getting a ticket then excuse me from it when I claim "Oh, sorry officer, I am going to exercise my birthright, and decline this ticket".

Now, quid pro quo, what examples do you need to see in order to acknowledge that "white privilege" is a mischaracterization of stereotype?

I need you to expound upon what "mischaracterization of stereotype" is, and how it relates to this particular issue.

Sure. Racism is a personally envisioned "boogey man". You see the worst characteristics in a person because of skin color, possibly because of a perceived bias. So, regarding "white privilege" its the opposite. Now, the best aspects of skin color are being assumed for all members of that skin color, and because of that, its being assumed to be a "pass". Oh, he is rich because he is white. This disregards the individual completely, just like racism previously mentioned, but discredits accomplishment.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
Fly
Posts: 2,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2016 4:06:47 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/16/2016 3:59:56 PM, lamerde wrote:
I've yet to see a real argument against the use of the word "privilege" except that it makes white people feel bad/guilty. There's nothing inherently wrong with the term and there's nothing about the definition of the word in academia or otherwise that would suggest it's offensive. What boggles my mind is the same people will turn around and decry political correctness and cry about restricting free speech, while complaining about what should be an innocuous word.

Yes, both wings of the political spectrum desire to control language for their own goals; it's just that the left wing admits to it more openly-- and does it far more uncomfortably for the status quo.

It's the epitome of egocentrism to hear a word like "privilege" and assume it's a personal attack.

The demonstrated reactions do expose a lot of irony...
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
lamerde
Posts: 1,416
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2016 4:19:16 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/16/2016 4:06:47 PM, Fly wrote:

Yes, both wings of the political spectrum desire to control language for their own goals; it's just that the left wing admits to it more openly-- and does it far more uncomfortably for the status quo.

The demonstrated reactions do expose a lot of irony...

Yes to all of this.
Why I ignore YYW:
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
Calling someone a bitch multiple times while claiming you're taking the high road is an art form, I suppose: http://www.debate.org...
Fly
Posts: 2,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2016 4:36:09 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/16/2016 4:03:16 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
White privilege is the concept that our society is centered around white people. Advantaged white people are made uncomfortable by the thought that the deck might be inherently (perhaps unfairly?) stacked in their favor, while disadvantaged white people downright resent the concept because they perceive no social advantage of any kind.

Generally speaking, racial discussions make most white people uncomfortable if not defensive. Why is that? Well, because white people are rarely ever made to feel conscious of their race, whereas people of color are quite conscious of theirs.

The term is intended to raise awareness not guilt. If the concept makes you uncomfortable, why is that? If it does, be aware that not everything is about making you comfortable. Finally, realize the irony of that.

This is a lot like saying "the pure of heart don't need lawyers" and "If you are not breaking the law, you have nothing to hide".

The polite version of a critique on the concept of "white privilege" is "Hey, look, a group of people didn't garner enough attention to make a negative stereotype".

No, its not all about making me 'comfortable', but the very concept is designed to make one feel uncomfortable; the social justice equivalent of gas lighting.




<clip>
In other words, you choose to remain oblivious to what is reality for minorities. It is no skin off your back to do so. That is your privilege (I tease, yes)...

Do you genuinely feel its difficult to deal with police and stay out of the news?

As a white person in a white society, it is not difficult for me. Put me in a society that doesn't cater to my race, and the reality could very well be different.

As for the news reference, you misunderstand my point-- that the news makes a big deal out of murders and kidnappings of white women and kids, but not black; that the news seems to go out of its way to show interviews with low class/uneducated black people when they do get airtime.

Because typically that is where crime occurs? They be climbing in your windows, snatching yo' people up... what good would it have been to interview Will Smith on the matter?

And missing the point of half of what I was explaining, and ignoring the other half...

I would think that women in the armed services could well relate-- when more and more aspects of military service opened up to women, especially Navy ships, it became uncomfortably obvious to women that the services have been geared towards accommodating the needs of the male gender.

... because they literally were. Women weren't allowed in combat roles. There is still a controversy as to what roles woman can/should fill regarding matters of ability.

You're really missing the point here. You think that the same hasn't been true for black people regarding military service through the decades/centuries?

How far back would you like for minorities to claim aggrieved status in society today? Where will the cut off be?

Are you missing my point on purpose, or... ?

Society was built for whites, by whites. How long until it wasn't/isn't? I get your point, I am just asking you to propose a solution, or at the very least a time table for assuming responsibility.

The good: you DO get it! But why the dismissive tone? The bad: you have merely been pretending not to get it and when you miss my point and waste my time, it IS on purpose. The ugly: the rest of your paragraph and the rest of your post revert back to you demonstrating that you don't get it.

How can you dare ask for solutions when you are so loathe to acknowledge there is even a problem?

As I have said already, the first solution is awareness-- an awareness that you resist at every turn as demonstrated in this very exchange...


Even if the term disappeared entirely, the reality of the situation would still be there whether you realize it or not-- it is "the way things are." And people of color would just be referencing that reality behind your back instead ; )

And what reality is that? You still haven't answered "how" it persists. Its going to take a lot of racism to keep that particular house of cards upright.

Yes, I have; you just choose to miss the point/put an unreasonable burden of proof on it. Again, you have no penalty for ignorance on this and a lack of discomfort to gain from that ignorance. The motivations to remain blissfully ignorant are obvious. You should also note that I have not made a case for "a lot of racism" here.

What the eff do you think labeling something "white privilege" is? The concept in of itself is racist by label!

Then change the label! Now, you are missing the point of the entire thread, which is how this label obstructs understanding and how best to change the label.

Even though it will still be pertaining to specifically whites are impressionably advantaged due to... reasons. But its still not racist.

So, you got nothing.

What example(s) do you need to see in order to acknowledge reality on this "inconvenient truth"?

That a privilege is some how taken when its not given. That is how a privilege works: you did something to earn it. A right is not earned: its gratis. A privilege (much like an entitlement) indicates you have done something (or will do something) for that benefit.

It is a de facto birthright. Does that work for you?

Its a birth right, but its not enforceable. How can you call it any kind of "right" in your explanation when I can't arbitrarily declare my whiteness and get away with something. No cop is going to be intent on me getting a ticket then excuse me from it when I claim "Oh, sorry officer, I am going to exercise my birthright, and decline this ticket".

Back to missing the point, as I mentioned earlier. Does getting the benefit of the doubt from law enforcement mean anything to you?

Now, quid pro quo, what examples do you need to see in order to acknowledge that "white privilege" is a mischaracterization of stereotype?

I need you to expound upon what "mischaracterization of stereotype" is, and how it relates to this particular issue.


Sure. Racism is a personally envisioned "boogey man". You see the worst characteristics in a person because of skin color, possibly because of a perceived bias. So, regarding "white privilege" its the opposite. Now, the best aspects of skin color are being assumed for all members of that skin color, and because of that, its being assumed to be a "pass". Oh, he is rich because he is white. This disregards the individual completely, just like racism previously mentioned, but discredits accomplishment.

I still don't see how this explains the concept of "mischaracterizing a stereotype."

And nope-- you still are not getting the point of the concept. Yes, some may take it to the lengths you portray, which constitutes abuse of the concept and leads to defeatism. But the concept, at least to me, means "everything else being equal, it is still better (i.e. more comfortable) to be white." Rather than simply accepting that truism, white people would much rather focus on the abuse of the term when it is discussed, as it is here. If the concept were not so predictably resisted, THEN we could all move on to the next step...
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2016 5:11:18 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
In other words, you choose to remain oblivious to what is reality for minorities. It is no skin off your back to do so. That is your privilege (I tease, yes)...

Do you genuinely feel its difficult to deal with police and stay out of the news?

As a white person in a white society, it is not difficult for me. Put me in a society that doesn't cater to my race, and the reality could very well be different.

As for the news reference, you misunderstand my point-- that the news makes a big deal out of murders and kidnappings of white women and kids, but not black; that the news seems to go out of its way to show interviews with low class/uneducated black people when they do get airtime.

Because typically that is where crime occurs? They be climbing in your windows, snatching yo' people up... what good would it have been to interview Will Smith on the matter?

And missing the point of half of what I was explaining, and ignoring the other half...

I am addressing what I can. Does the interviewing anchor person need to distribute IQ tests? Regarding the other half: depending on the nature of the crime is what gets reported, at least from what I see across various media. Anyone killed or kidnapped when its not news worthy (gang bangers spraying a porch or meth addicts knifing each other in an alley), it is only a blip on the radar. It when something uncharacteristic happens (white girl kidnapped from school) that its newsworthy.

You're really missing the point here. You think that the same hasn't been true for black people regarding military service through the decades/centuries?

How far back would you like for minorities to claim aggrieved status in society today? Where will the cut off be?

Are you missing my point on purpose, or... ?

Society was built for whites, by whites. How long until it wasn't/isn't? I get your point, I am just asking you to propose a solution, or at the very least a time table for assuming responsibility.

The good: you DO get it! But why the dismissive tone? The bad: you have merely been pretending not to get it and when you miss my point and waste my time, it IS on purpose.

Because I think personal responsibility can be injected to fix what the supposed problem is.

The ugly: the rest of your paragraph and the rest of your post revert back to you demonstrating that you don't get it.

How can you dare ask for solutions when you are so loathe to acknowledge there is even a problem?

Because the solution is admission that staying out of the news and not getting on a cop's bad side require the anathema of wanting to be a victim: acceptance of personal responsibility.

As I have said already, the first solution is awareness-- an awareness that you resist at every turn as demonstrated in this very exchange...

Because the ugly truth is that its not about privilege, its about blame. Blacks can't get a fair shake, cause gosh darn it, they are black, and its a white society. Its better (easier)to pin "permanent victim" on your chest than it is to make something of yourself.


Even if the term disappeared entirely, the reality of the situation would still be there whether you realize it or not-- it is "the way things are." And people of color would just be referencing that reality behind your back instead ; )

And what reality is that? You still haven't answered "how" it persists. Its going to take a lot of racism to keep that particular house of cards upright.

Yes, I have; you just choose to miss the point/put an unreasonable burden of proof on it. Again, you have no penalty for ignorance on this and a lack of discomfort to gain from that ignorance. The motivations to remain blissfully ignorant are obvious. You should also note that I have not made a case for "a lot of racism" here.

What the eff do you think labeling something "white privilege" is? The concept in of itself is racist by label!

Then change the label! Now, you are missing the point of the entire thread, which is how this label obstructs understanding and how best to change the label.

Even though it will still be pertaining to specifically whites are impressionably advantaged due to... reasons. But its still not racist.

So, you got nothing.

How does changing the label of something inherently racist stop it from being inherently racist?

What example(s) do you need to see in order to acknowledge reality on this "inconvenient truth"?

That a privilege is some how taken when its not given. That is how a privilege works: you did something to earn it. A right is not earned: its gratis. A privilege (much like an entitlement) indicates you have done something (or will do something) for that benefit.

It is a de facto birthright. Does that work for you?

Its a birth right, but its not enforceable. How can you call it any kind of "right" in your explanation when I can't arbitrarily declare my whiteness and get away with something. No cop is going to be intent on me getting a ticket then excuse me from it when I claim "Oh, sorry officer, I am going to exercise my birthright, and decline this ticket".

Back to missing the point, as I mentioned earlier. Does getting the benefit of the doubt from law enforcement mean anything to you?

How did that occur? How did that stereotype get set up in that cops head?

Now, quid pro quo, what examples do you need to see in order to acknowledge that "white privilege" is a mischaracterization of stereotype?

I need you to expound upon what "mischaracterization of stereotype" is, and how it relates to this particular issue.


Sure. Racism is a personally envisioned "boogey man". You see the worst characteristics in a person because of skin color, possibly because of a perceived bias. So, regarding "white privilege" its the opposite. Now, the best aspects of skin color are being assumed for all members of that skin color, and because of that, its being assumed to be a "pass". Oh, he is rich because he is white. This disregards the individual completely, just like racism previously mentioned, but discredits accomplishment.

I still don't see how this explains the concept of "mischaracterizing a stereotype."

The white person is "mischaracterized", that being something is thought of them which is incorrect through via a relevant caricature of racial impression (a stereotype).

And nope-- you still are not getting the point of the concept. Yes, some may take it to the lengths you portray,

Like a society catering to whites? That kind of lengths?

which constitutes abuse of the concept and leads to defeatism. But the concept, at least to me, means "everything else being equal, it is still better (i.e. more comfortable) to be white." Rather than simply accepting that truism, white people would much rather focus on the abuse of the term when it is discussed, as it is here. If the concept were not so predictably resisted, THEN we could all move on ...

to what? This is what I mean by a solution. What is the end game? A society where being white is equally easy as being black? Great, considering whites (apparently) got that by building the society they are being catered to in, how do we get a solution?
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...