9 ms·

One of the ways racism expresses itself in the US is in child poverty. We can't offer public assistance to poor children because it creates "welfare queens", wh

by guelo 12y ago

One of the ways racism expresses itself in the US is in child poverty. We can't offer public assistance to poor children because it creates "welfare queens", which is a stereotype that whites have about blacks that they are lazy and will cheat.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
- dalke 12y ago
  Huh? What does hate have to do with anything? Use it to recognize the privileges you have, and then use those privileges to help others share those privileges. It's not easy, of course. "Sharing the privilege" of being part of the dominant Christian culture in the US doesn't means helping others become Christian. But neither doesn't mean hating oneself for being Christian.
  - bicx 12y ago
    I apologize. It was a bit of a knee-jerk reaction to the parent comment, and I tend to get offended by statements that imply all white people are privileged racists. Maybe that's not how it was meant to be understood.
    - jacobolus 12y ago
      White people are privileged. Being privileged doesn’t imply anything about a person’s actions or beliefs. As a straight white man, I’m privileged because when I walk down the street, I don’t need to worry about men whistling at me or trying to grope me. I don’t need to worry about being detained by cops for looking “threatening” just by virtue of my skin color. I can cross the border without anyone suspecting me of forging immigration documents. I can easily get married to my partner almost anywhere in the world. I don‘t need to worry (in the workplace, or in political discourse, or just talking to strangers in the street) about being seen as an outsider, and I’m treated as an individual rather than continually judged against a stereotype. Being privileged doesn’t have anything to do specifically with my actions, and if a gay man, or a woman, or a Latino points out that I am privileged, they are not making any claim about my beliefs, and it’s nothing personal. (And they are absolutely correct, I am privileged.) You should not be offended when people call you privileged, unless you are sure that they are making a statement about your individual beliefs, rather than just neutral statements about the prevailing structure in the society (and then you should still try to avoid responding with anger; it’s almost never really personal). Instead of taking offense, you should try to talk to these people and understand where they’re coming from and why they’re frustrated. If you listen carefully and empathetically, you may find yourself just as outraged at the injustices in our society.
      - bicx 12y ago
        Thanks for the well-worded response. The idea of white privilege isn't what offends me, and I don't argue with the fact that being who I am opens a lot of doors. What offended me was the implication of racism a general characteristic. I strive to treat everyone equally, and when someone assumes I'm racist because I'm white, that is seen to me as an injustice (hence the overly-sarcastic response I wrote and then deleted). That's the danger with generalizations. There may be prevailing problem within a people group, but making generalized statements is really disheartening to those who are trying to be different. Additionally, it doesn't encourage the perpetrators to change; it just gives them an identity and makes them feel that they have a whole race just like them.
        dalke 12y ago
        There is a narrative that those who object to the status quo do so from hate. Women who point out sexism do so because they hate men, and men who agree must surely hate themselves. Black people who point out racism do so because they hate white people, and those white people who agree must surely hate themselves. Those who point out severe economic inequality in the US are communists or socialists who hate America. Those who want a secular government which doesn't favor one specific religion do so because they hate Jesus. And so on. It's very easy language to use. It implies the opposition is based in unthinking emotions so can be ignored. It's also true that some may actually be driven by hatred or self-hatred; and for that matter be based in very logical reasoning. But the hate narrative assumes that what's true perhaps for one (possibly imaginary) person who opposes a given status quo is also true for the entire opposition. Yes, the g'g'parent post used a stereotype that white people have a specific stereotypes of black people. Your deleted response, which used language often used to keep the status quo, also implied a stereotype, and as you said, generalizations don't help. What about a response like: "While that is a stereotype some white people believe, it's far from universal. I'm one counter-example. That said, I agree that the dying racist belief has had a real and horrible effect on how we deal with child poverty."? I think that defends your views of yourself without derailing the conversation, while also discouraging the perpetrators of racism and supporting the main point of the original poster. (Remember, this is a post on education, not your views of race privilege or how to address racists.) I'm all for a Finnish-style education system, backed by a strong social safety net with an emphasis on children. That includes, as maxerickson pointed out, a sufficiently supported school meal program. Racist views have helped shape our current system, and I think economic greed, including cutting taxes and the commercialization of education, are growing factors.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
maxerickson 12y ago
Schools are a major vehicle for a federal program that provides assistance to poor children: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_School_Lunch_Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_School_Lunch_Act (followed by a similar program for breakfast, and then summer camps)
javert 12y ago
Child poverty is not a result of racism. Child poverty is a result of people choosing to have children that they cannot support. They choose to do this with the foreknowledge that society will not provide for those children. At least, not enough to life them out of poverty. People need to stop blaming everything on racism, and calling lots of things racist that simply are not. Conflating the issues hurts on all fronts. In other words, it makes it harder to identify and solve the real problem, and it makes "racism" meaningless in the public dialog.
- artsrc 12y ago
  Let's imagine you care about educational outcomes and child poverty, what kinds of things would help? Certainly free and easy access to sex education, contraception and abortion is something that is a good policy. People, even poor people, have always, and will always want children. Once children are born to poor parents, you need to address that poverty, or you will get poor educational outcomes for those children. Certainly stigmatizing poor people, rather than focusing on bad luck they have had, will provoke different policy outcomes.
  - javert 12y ago
    I didn't stigmatize poor people. If you consider stating facts of reality to be stigmatization, you are fighting reality, and that is no way to deal with it. > rather than focusing on bad luck they have had One of the main point of the article is precisely that being poor is not bad luck: overall, it happens because a person didn't take education seriously because they were not taught to do so by their parents. I mean, you can say it's bad luck to be born to such parents, and I would agree there.
- guelo 12y ago
  White guy thinks racism doesn't affect anything, news at 11.
  - javert 12y ago
    I did not say that racism doesn't affect anything, and I don't believe that. Nobody is convinced by this kind of irrelevant taunting. It has no place in a rational discussion.
refurb 12y ago
We can't offer public assistance to poor children because it creates "welfare queens", which is a stereotype that whites have about blacks that they are lazy and will cheat. Do you have evidence that public assistance is being withheld? If anything, people aren't taking advantage of public assistance available. I remember reading that Medicaid (health insurance for the poor) was only used by half of the people eligible.

by guelo 12y ago

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

dalke 12y ago
Huh? What does hate have to do with anything? Use it to recognize the privileges you have, and then use those privileges to help others share those privileges. It's not easy, of course. "Sharing the privilege" of being part of the dominant Christian culture in the US doesn't means helping others become Christian. But neither doesn't mean hating oneself for being Christian.
- bicx 12y ago
  I apologize. It was a bit of a knee-jerk reaction to the parent comment, and I tend to get offended by statements that imply all white people are privileged racists. Maybe that's not how it was meant to be understood.
  - jacobolus 12y ago
    White people are privileged. Being privileged doesn’t imply anything about a person’s actions or beliefs. As a straight white man, I’m privileged because when I walk down the street, I don’t need to worry about men whistling at me or trying to grope me. I don’t need to worry about being detained by cops for looking “threatening” just by virtue of my skin color. I can cross the border without anyone suspecting me of forging immigration documents. I can easily get married to my partner almost anywhere in the world. I don‘t need to worry (in the workplace, or in political discourse, or just talking to strangers in the street) about being seen as an outsider, and I’m treated as an individual rather than continually judged against a stereotype. Being privileged doesn’t have anything to do specifically with my actions, and if a gay man, or a woman, or a Latino points out that I am privileged, they are not making any claim about my beliefs, and it’s nothing personal. (And they are absolutely correct, I am privileged.) You should not be offended when people call you privileged, unless you are sure that they are making a statement about your individual beliefs, rather than just neutral statements about the prevailing structure in the society (and then you should still try to avoid responding with anger; it’s almost never really personal). Instead of taking offense, you should try to talk to these people and understand where they’re coming from and why they’re frustrated. If you listen carefully and empathetically, you may find yourself just as outraged at the injustices in our society.
    - bicx 12y ago
      Thanks for the well-worded response. The idea of white privilege isn't what offends me, and I don't argue with the fact that being who I am opens a lot of doors. What offended me was the implication of racism a general characteristic. I strive to treat everyone equally, and when someone assumes I'm racist because I'm white, that is seen to me as an injustice (hence the overly-sarcastic response I wrote and then deleted). That's the danger with generalizations. There may be prevailing problem within a people group, but making generalized statements is really disheartening to those who are trying to be different. Additionally, it doesn't encourage the perpetrators to change; it just gives them an identity and makes them feel that they have a whole race just like them.
      - dalke 12y ago
        There is a narrative that those who object to the status quo do so from hate. Women who point out sexism do so because they hate men, and men who agree must surely hate themselves. Black people who point out racism do so because they hate white people, and those white people who agree must surely hate themselves. Those who point out severe economic inequality in the US are communists or socialists who hate America. Those who want a secular government which doesn't favor one specific religion do so because they hate Jesus. And so on. It's very easy language to use. It implies the opposition is based in unthinking emotions so can be ignored. It's also true that some may actually be driven by hatred or self-hatred; and for that matter be based in very logical reasoning. But the hate narrative assumes that what's true perhaps for one (possibly imaginary) person who opposes a given status quo is also true for the entire opposition. Yes, the g'g'parent post used a stereotype that white people have a specific stereotypes of black people. Your deleted response, which used language often used to keep the status quo, also implied a stereotype, and as you said, generalizations don't help. What about a response like: "While that is a stereotype some white people believe, it's far from universal. I'm one counter-example. That said, I agree that the dying racist belief has had a real and horrible effect on how we deal with child poverty."? I think that defends your views of yourself without derailing the conversation, while also discouraging the perpetrators of racism and supporting the main point of the original poster. (Remember, this is a post on education, not your views of race privilege or how to address racists.) I'm all for a Finnish-style education system, backed by a strong social safety net with an emphasis on children. That includes, as maxerickson pointed out, a sufficiently supported school meal program. Racist views have helped shape our current system, and I think economic greed, including cutting taxes and the commercialization of education, are growing factors.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]

maxerickson 12y ago

Schools are a major vehicle for a federal program that provides assistance to poor children: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_School_Lunch_Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_School_Lunch_Act (followed by a similar program for breakfast, and then summer camps)

javert 12y ago

Child poverty is not a result of racism. Child poverty is a result of people choosing to have children that they cannot support. They choose to do this with the foreknowledge that society will not provide for those children. At least, not enough to life them out of poverty. People need to stop blaming everything on racism, and calling lots of things racist that simply are not. Conflating the issues hurts on all fronts. In other words, it makes it harder to identify and solve the real problem, and it makes "racism" meaningless in the public dialog.

artsrc 12y ago
Let's imagine you care about educational outcomes and child poverty, what kinds of things would help? Certainly free and easy access to sex education, contraception and abortion is something that is a good policy. People, even poor people, have always, and will always want children. Once children are born to poor parents, you need to address that poverty, or you will get poor educational outcomes for those children. Certainly stigmatizing poor people, rather than focusing on bad luck they have had, will provoke different policy outcomes.
- javert 12y ago
  I didn't stigmatize poor people. If you consider stating facts of reality to be stigmatization, you are fighting reality, and that is no way to deal with it. > rather than focusing on bad luck they have had One of the main point of the article is precisely that being poor is not bad luck: overall, it happens because a person didn't take education seriously because they were not taught to do so by their parents. I mean, you can say it's bad luck to be born to such parents, and I would agree there.
guelo 12y ago
White guy thinks racism doesn't affect anything, news at 11.
- javert 12y ago
  I did not say that racism doesn't affect anything, and I don't believe that. Nobody is convinced by this kind of irrelevant taunting. It has no place in a rational discussion.

refurb 12y ago

We can't offer public assistance to poor children because it creates "welfare queens", which is a stereotype that whites have about blacks that they are lazy and will cheat. Do you have evidence that public assistance is being withheld? If anything, people aren't taking advantage of public assistance available. I remember reading that Medicaid (health insurance for the poor) was only used by half of the people eligible.