12 ms·

I'll keep this polite and assume you're intelligent and informed, a courtesy you did not extend to me. You are aware that Irish and Eastern Europeans, and

I'll keep this polite and assume you're intelligent and informed, a courtesy you did not extend to me. You are aware that Irish and Eastern Europeans, and on and off through history Greek and Italian, have had all those same problems right? I'm very, very aware of that fact. Hey, for the record, I'm partly Welsh. The Welsh have been oppressed by everybody! They're pretty damn white. Literally nobody is denying that Italians, Irish, Eastern Europeans, or people from unfashionable parts of Brussels, or your mother's uncle's cousin from Estonia, have faced discrimination at various points in time, and perhaps still do today. White Privilege should just be called White Devil. I won't try and change your opinion, but you should at least understand what the concept of "white privilege" means. It absolutely does not imply that white people are bad, or that white people are devils, or anything of the sort. The concept of white privilege is a way of viewing things that challenges us to observe freedoms that we as white people have that others don't always enjoy. For example: as a white person, if a cop pulls me over, I may be treated unfairly. But whatever happens, I generally know that I won't be treated badly because of my race. He certainly didn't pull me over because I'm fucking part Welsh, I can tell you that! Black people don't have that privilege. Now, 99% of the time, maybe their race doesn't have anything to do with their interactions with the police. Most cops are good people. But wouldn't it suck to be black and never really know if a cop was going to treat you badly simply because you're black? And that at least once or twice in your life, it probably will happen? That's some bullshit I don't really ever have to deal with in my life. A privilege I have, if you will. Now, like I said above, I can't help but wonder if we do need some new terminology here. I am certain that I have not changed your mind. Again, I'm just defining the concept for you. You can agree with it or disagree with it at this point. That's cool. But your post made it very clear that you had no understanding of the concept. Probably because the term "white privilege" itself was a turn-off. You probably thought it was an attack on white people. It's not.

blub 11y ago
The privilege you enjoy you do not enjoy because of being a white male, but rather because you're part of one of the dominant social groups. If you go to another country you'll see that people do treat you differently and might discriminate against you depending on your sex/looks/ancestry/etc. Those that are different always have some disadvantages. We should be working towards fair societies, not replacing one type of discrimination with another.
- JohnBooty 11y ago
  I don't understand how recognizing my privilege as a white male in America equates to discrimination. Can you explain in detail?
  - ElComradio 11y ago
    It's simply intractable to add up everyone's advantages and disadvantages; it's the wrong path to focus on group attributes/trends when you start talking about individuals. I could clamor for tall rich sportsmen to "send the elevator down for me". That it's their responsibility and so on. What you should do is reflect on exactly why you'd think I should feel silly for saying that, and the other guy to not. Would you tell Michael Jordan to check his privilege if he told a group of average white male nerds to reflect on theirs?
    - JohnBooty 11y ago
      It's simply intractable to add up everyone's advantages and disadvantages Sure. it's the wrong path to focus on group attributes/trends when you start talking about individuals. Absolute nonsense. If a particular school had a 30% graduation rate while every other school in the state averaged 80%, would you say, "Wait a minute! It's the wrong path to talk about this school in particular. These are individual kids..." As you say, every individual human being certainly is more than the some of their labels. But when gross inequalities between groups emerge, it's lunacy to suggest there are no greater group-wide forces at work on scales greater than the individual. Would you tell Michael Jordan to check his privilege if he told a group of average white male nerds to reflect on theirs? Is Michael Jordan a group of people? Unless there's a clone army of Michael Jordans out there that I don't know about, this theoretical question is bizarre and irrelevant to anything anybody is talking about. I'm not even sure what you're getting at here. He is a part of some privileged groups (rich people, people with one-in-a-million athletic ability, men) and not others. I could clamor for tall rich sportsmen to "send the elevator down for me". That it's their responsibility and so on. Michael Jordan can't make you a rich, tall sportsman. That's not... physically possible. However, the author of the original article suggested that we help others achieve careers in our industry. Now that certainly does seem possible, doesn't it? Hardly even seems controversial, if you ask me.
throwanem 11y ago
Is it more important to you to use that specific term, or to get your point across? Because the one seems to be getting in the way of the other, is the point that's under discussion here.
- JohnBooty 11y ago
  The point is way more important. Like I said, I do suspect that the term is actually hindering the effort at this point.
Styx- 11y ago
And see this is the part that I never got past. In your example, it's the cop that's committing the infraction. And yet, I'm the one that is expected to improve the situation, despite the fact that I've never been racist. I'm all for helping people that have been disadvantaged in life. What I'm not okay with is the fact that society expects me to do anything on the basis of my skin color or gender. I will do something if I think it's the right and moral thing to do, not because a bunch of people on the internet told me it was the right thing to do. I think the disconnect lies in that many people (such as yourself) believe that it's such a clear cut thing when in reality it's much grayer, like everything else in life. Essentially, stop telling other people how to live their lives.
- JohnBooty 11y ago
  In your example, it's the cop that's committing the infraction. And yet, I'm the one that is expected to improve the situation, despite the fact that I've never been racist. You're not expected to fix it, or even feel guilt about it! Honestly. Seriously. I don't feel "guilty" if a white cop murders a black person, just like I don't feel guilty if I see somebody in a wheelchair. I do hate it, and I do try to consider how lucky I am, and maybe hopefully think about how I can make that situation better, or at least not make it worse. The idea is literally just to recognize that the inequality exists. Obviously the hope is that once we recognize that inequalities exist, we might want to address them somehow. Maybe as a society, maybe just as individuals being more mindful of how we treat others. Like if I get resumes from "Edmund Smith" and "Jamal Brown." Should I automatically hire "Jamal Brown" because he "sounds black?" Hell no. Should I take an honest look at myself and make sure I'm not making assumptions based on what I assume to be Jamal's race and what I assume people of his race are like? Yes. If I work at a large company, should I maybe even look at the data and see if we as a company are rejecting "black sounding" candidates more often than "white sounding" candidates of equal qualifications? Probably, yeah, because it's the right thing to do and our company is only hurting itself if our hiring process is being compromised by inequal hiring practices. Anyway, even if you hate those examples I just gave, know that the goal of recognizing privilege is awareness.
oniony 11y ago
Kept your dignity. I like it.
AudaIbuTayi 11y ago
> You probably thought it was an attack on white people. Prima facie, the use of the term leads people to believe that an identifiable group of people (white people) has obtained things which they do not deserve (privilege). A typical human response to being told that another group has things which were unjustly obtained is resentment and hostility. This is inevitable and obvious. The term is by its construction divisive. > It's not. That's merely an assertion. The term is a tool. Some people use it to try to effect positive change for certain groups of people (I'm assuming this includes you). Some people very much can and do use it as a weapon to enact their idea of retribution.
logfromblammo 11y ago
I smell cheese coming out from your window. You been driving under the influence tonight? Maybe chasing the red dragon? Out of the car and put your hands on the hood, Taffy. Am I going to find any sheep or coal in your vehicle, sir? Maybe some really bland food? ~

blub 11y ago

The privilege you enjoy you do not enjoy because of being a white male, but rather because you're part of one of the dominant social groups. If you go to another country you'll see that people do treat you differently and might discriminate against you depending on your sex/looks/ancestry/etc. Those that are different always have some disadvantages. We should be working towards fair societies, not replacing one type of discrimination with another.

JohnBooty 11y ago
I don't understand how recognizing my privilege as a white male in America equates to discrimination. Can you explain in detail?
- ElComradio 11y ago
  It's simply intractable to add up everyone's advantages and disadvantages; it's the wrong path to focus on group attributes/trends when you start talking about individuals. I could clamor for tall rich sportsmen to "send the elevator down for me". That it's their responsibility and so on. What you should do is reflect on exactly why you'd think I should feel silly for saying that, and the other guy to not. Would you tell Michael Jordan to check his privilege if he told a group of average white male nerds to reflect on theirs?
  - JohnBooty 11y ago
    It's simply intractable to add up everyone's advantages and disadvantages Sure. it's the wrong path to focus on group attributes/trends when you start talking about individuals. Absolute nonsense. If a particular school had a 30% graduation rate while every other school in the state averaged 80%, would you say, "Wait a minute! It's the wrong path to talk about this school in particular. These are individual kids..." As you say, every individual human being certainly is more than the some of their labels. But when gross inequalities between groups emerge, it's lunacy to suggest there are no greater group-wide forces at work on scales greater than the individual. Would you tell Michael Jordan to check his privilege if he told a group of average white male nerds to reflect on theirs? Is Michael Jordan a group of people? Unless there's a clone army of Michael Jordans out there that I don't know about, this theoretical question is bizarre and irrelevant to anything anybody is talking about. I'm not even sure what you're getting at here. He is a part of some privileged groups (rich people, people with one-in-a-million athletic ability, men) and not others. I could clamor for tall rich sportsmen to "send the elevator down for me". That it's their responsibility and so on. Michael Jordan can't make you a rich, tall sportsman. That's not... physically possible. However, the author of the original article suggested that we help others achieve careers in our industry. Now that certainly does seem possible, doesn't it? Hardly even seems controversial, if you ask me.

throwanem 11y ago

Is it more important to you to use that specific term, or to get your point across? Because the one seems to be getting in the way of the other, is the point that's under discussion here.

JohnBooty 11y ago
The point is way more important. Like I said, I do suspect that the term is actually hindering the effort at this point.

Styx- 11y ago

And see this is the part that I never got past. In your example, it's the cop that's committing the infraction. And yet, I'm the one that is expected to improve the situation, despite the fact that I've never been racist. I'm all for helping people that have been disadvantaged in life. What I'm not okay with is the fact that society expects me to do anything on the basis of my skin color or gender. I will do something if I think it's the right and moral thing to do, not because a bunch of people on the internet told me it was the right thing to do. I think the disconnect lies in that many people (such as yourself) believe that it's such a clear cut thing when in reality it's much grayer, like everything else in life. Essentially, stop telling other people how to live their lives.

JohnBooty 11y ago
In your example, it's the cop that's committing the infraction. And yet, I'm the one that is expected to improve the situation, despite the fact that I've never been racist. You're not expected to fix it, or even feel guilt about it! Honestly. Seriously. I don't feel "guilty" if a white cop murders a black person, just like I don't feel guilty if I see somebody in a wheelchair. I do hate it, and I do try to consider how lucky I am, and maybe hopefully think about how I can make that situation better, or at least not make it worse. The idea is literally just to recognize that the inequality exists. Obviously the hope is that once we recognize that inequalities exist, we might want to address them somehow. Maybe as a society, maybe just as individuals being more mindful of how we treat others. Like if I get resumes from "Edmund Smith" and "Jamal Brown." Should I automatically hire "Jamal Brown" because he "sounds black?" Hell no. Should I take an honest look at myself and make sure I'm not making assumptions based on what I assume to be Jamal's race and what I assume people of his race are like? Yes. If I work at a large company, should I maybe even look at the data and see if we as a company are rejecting "black sounding" candidates more often than "white sounding" candidates of equal qualifications? Probably, yeah, because it's the right thing to do and our company is only hurting itself if our hiring process is being compromised by inequal hiring practices. Anyway, even if you hate those examples I just gave, know that the goal of recognizing privilege is awareness.

oniony 11y ago

Kept your dignity. I like it.

AudaIbuTayi 11y ago

> You probably thought it was an attack on white people. Prima facie, the use of the term leads people to believe that an identifiable group of people (white people) has obtained things which they do not deserve (privilege). A typical human response to being told that another group has things which were unjustly obtained is resentment and hostility. This is inevitable and obvious. The term is by its construction divisive. > It's not. That's merely an assertion. The term is a tool. Some people use it to try to effect positive change for certain groups of people (I'm assuming this includes you). Some people very much can and do use it as a weapon to enact their idea of retribution.

logfromblammo 11y ago

I smell cheese coming out from your window. You been driving under the influence tonight? Maybe chasing the red dragon? Out of the car and put your hands on the hood, Taffy. Am I going to find any sheep or coal in your vehicle, sir? Maybe some really bland food? ~