3 ms·

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

by 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.

by bicx 12y ago

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.