Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Recommended Posts

It might not be your "problem", but you shouldn't get mad if it rubs people the wrong way either.

Again, their problem. They were obviously reading something into what I said which wasn't there. The proper response, if unsure, would be, "what do you mean?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're a real bad-ass.

-k

I know, right?

Seriously though, I'm pretty Liberal, but a lot of this goes too far. I'm not trying to offend anyone. I'm just not going to do the ridiculous to get there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I met a girl at a party this summer and without asking her directly, I found out within 2 minutes that she was a student from Taiwan. I mean, this stuff isn't rocket science.

-k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I met a girl at a party this summer and without asking her directly, I found out within 2 minutes that she was a student from Taiwan. I mean, this stuff isn't rocket science.

Sure, and that's fine. I just don't see any of it as a reason to take offence. I think it has more to do with looking for something that isn't there because of past experiences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the term "white privilege" is a term that is deeply offensive to many and the use of the term is clearly a micro-aggression. Those of you who claim that microaggressions are really nothing but a way to raise awareness about how speach can be hurtful should have no problems agreeing, unless, of course, you are willing to admit that microaggressions have nothing to with raising awareness about hurtful terms and are really about spreading a regressive ideology that forever divides society between victims and oppressors based on one's DNA.

White privilege refers to systematic and often subconscious biases that exist throughout society and largely but not exclusively to white people. It describes a social phenomena. It could be called european group colonial effect, it wouldn't make a difference in what it is describing. What is your issue in particular with the term that you feel it is aggressive?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The argument is when an individual faces barriers and difficulties in life they reject the notion that they enjoy special privileges because of the colour of their skin. They use their own stories of hardship to demonstrate how they, as an individual, did not get any special breaks.

This is a classic example of how it is simply wrong to apply aggregate statistics to individuals. For example, aggregate statistics show the IQ of blacks is less that whites who have an IQ less than asians. But the variance is so large that the aggregate statistics tells use nothing useful about the relative IQs of individuals which is why most people don't put much weight on such statistics. Unfortunately, the PC crowd seems to have forgotten why aggregate statistics cannot be applied to individuals and terms like "white privilege" are meaningless exercises in race baiting.

To be accurate it depends on who writes the IQ test. IQ test written by whites show whites are the smartest. IQ test written by French show French are the smartest. And IQ test written by originals show african americans are the smartest.

However, the people who have studied the IQ test have found the difference in scoring is due to difference in linguistics. There are about 6 ways to measure IQ. Vocabulary accounts for the difference in scores of white IQ test. In otherwords it isn't a difference of intelligence, it is a difference of culturally prefered language. For instance, a wasp is far more likely to know what a word like vituperative is whereas an African American is much more familiar with the term the signifying. This is why whites score so poorly on the Black written IQ test. I haven't seen a neutral IQ test. It would be very difficult to generate a neutral one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, it's impossible to for anyone with half a brain to deny that certain groups like non-whites and women sometimes face discrimination from some white males, who may be in positions of authority.

The thing is, other non-white racial groups are just as discriminating against whites as whites are against them. It just happens that it was mostly whites who historically built Canada and historically have been the dominant race with the most money and power, so their discrimination is the primary focus (and rightfully so I think). But we also need to recognize ALL forms of racial (and sexual) discrimination, and denounce them all.

The thing that bothers me is when you have many "privileged white" families who have lived in Canada a century or more, have worked hard, paid their taxes, in most cases had family members fight or die in wars defending Canada and thus these families have reaped the benefits of Canada's prosperity and secured good futures for their children...but then you have other families who have immigrated into Canada in the last few decades from very poor countries who don't arrive here with as much economic wealth and yet they (or white people who sympathize with them) blame the difference in wealth, education, and career level between recent immigrants and the "privileged whites" who have been in Canada for centuries entirely on racial discrimination by the "privileged whites" while living in this country. In some cases some of it may have to do with racial discrimination by whites but certainly not all or even most of it is. I mean if horse A has been running the race a lot longer than horse B, horse A is obviously going to be ahead. Those better off should help out those less advantaged but we all need to be fair and reasonable too.

This isn't all that disagreeable. But why was Horse B banned from running for hundreds of years? Why was horse B enslaved by horse A and had his land stolen by horse A. Is that not some of the privilege horse A gets? All of horse A gets benefits from white privilege. The real question or judgement shouldn't be if he has it or not, or how much he has gotten it. The real question should be, what is horse A doing with his horse privilege.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

White privilege refers to systematic and often subconscious biases that exist throughout society and largely but not exclusively to white people. It describes a social phenomena. It could be called european group colonial effect, it wouldn't make a difference in what it is describing. What is your issue in particular with the term that you feel it is aggressive?

The argument people use to rationalize the concept of "microagressions" is that it does not matter what the speaker means or intends. The only thing that matters is how the listener feels about the words. Given that context "white privilege" is a microagression that is often used to denigrate the opinion of someone because of their skin colour and should not be used. Of course, you are free to admit that the obsession with "microagressions" is not about teaching people how to be civil but about pushing a specific political agenda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The argument people use to rationalize the concept of "microagressions" is that it does not matter what the speaker means or intends. The only thing that matters is how the listener feels about the words.

How is that different from the concept of 'politeness' ? Communication is a two-way street. If I say something that offends you, without intention, wouldn't I amend my speech to stop doing that ?

Given that context "white privilege" is a microagression that is often used to denigrate the opinion of someone because of their skin colour and should not be used. Of course, you are free to admit that the obsession with "microagressions" is not about teaching people how to be civil but about pushing a specific political agenda.

I think you're guessing at the motives behind the movement, which is fair on a web board... but I would say polite company would refrain from accusations of hidden agendas, including unknowing racist statements. I would treat this matter as if I heard a beloved old relative say something offensive. There are times when you need to make a public rebuke, but most of the time you can speak to somebody and let them know that their words may be having an unintended effect.

You can do this most of the time without hectoring or finger-wagging, and most people don't want to make a big deal of such things. But on web boards, we are free to discuss things at length, to lecture and moralize... and so be it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is that different from the concept of 'politeness' ? Communication is a two-way street. If I say something that offends you, without intention, wouldn't I amend my speech to stop doing that ?

Depends on what you are a talking about. I am not not going to stop arguing that vaccines are safe because someone finds it offensive. When someone is offended sometimes it is the person taking offense that needs to change and this debate is about where that line should be.

I think you're guessing at the motives behind the movement, which is fair on a web board...

I am proposing a test: people who believe what they are arguing when it comes to microaggressions have no problems saying that "white privilege" can be an microagression (e.g. kimmy). People with a "hidden agenda" find it more difficult to make that admission.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When someone is offended sometimes it is the person taking offense that needs to change and this debate is about where that line should be.

Well, yes, of course it depends. I don't think it would be reasonably expected for you to guess at everything somebody could be offended by, and in every context. An 'argument', as you put it, is already a level above a general, open and polite discussion in terms of social complexity, and the inherent trust factor involved.

I am proposing a test: people who believe what they are arguing when it comes to microaggressions have no problems saying that "white privilege" can be an microagression (e.g. kimmy). People with a "hidden agenda" find it more difficult to make that admission.

There's that word 'arguing' again. I confess that I haven't followed this that closely, but is this an idea that debating on a web board has the same rules as speaking in person, face-to-face, or online at work or in social situations ?

If so, I heartily disagree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems that we have intertwined "white privilege" with "microagressions"...Interesting.

It does fit though because, I rarely get offended by anything. However, when I hear about white privilege, I do get offended. It bugs the hell out of me that there is even a remote suggestion that I didn't get what I have through hard work. Both my wife and I had extremely unsupportive parents, and found ways to work full time and further our educations at the same time. Get married, buy a house, have kids, cars etc., and we did it without white privilege.

Yes, I get offended when I hear that term, because it diminishes everything I've worked for...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems that we have intertwined "white privilege" with "microagressions"...Interesting.

---SNIP---

Sorry if you are white in Canada, you have white privilege. Simple as that. It isn't even a question of. It hasn't even occured to you, you might not be employed if you weren't white, you might not get that home loan because of discrimination against non-white lenders. You see people don't notice that they were got the loan they were suppose to get. People don't notice they got the job they were suppose to get. But the Chinese or Indian who had more education, more income, more credit than you but got denied the loan, sure does notice.

White privilege isn't something a white person would even really notice. No one is rolling out a red carpet and a clown horn infront of you. Its how having an English or german accent makes you "smart" but having a Chinese accent makes it harder to rent an apartment. The English doesn't notice he called in, and got what he was suppose to get.

Edited by H10
excessive quoting [---SNIP---]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry if you are white in Canada, you have white privilege. Simple as that.

---SNIP---

Utter nonsense!!! I personally know tons of people that are not white that are way more successful than I, or many "whites" I know are. They live in better neighborhoods, live in nicer homes, drive nicer cars, take more vacations, etc. etc. When debating the refugee/immigrant topics I see people from the left arguing how well many of them have done since coming to Canada. How could they ever have done well with all the "white privilege" that oppresses them every day. Yet another example of the hypocrisy from the left.

"White privilege" is just another myth created by the left so they can thump their moral superiority chests. End of story as far as I'm concerned.

Edited by Charles Anthony
excessive quoting [---SNIP---]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

White privilege isn't something a white person would even really notice.

Because it does not exist. You cannot take an aggregate analysis and apply them to individuals because the variation within groups is much larger than the variation between groups. From a methodological perspective you are doing exactly what people who look at IQ distributions and claim that blacks are less intelligent. You are peddling racism.

Its how having an English or german accent makes you "smart" but having a Chinese accent makes it harder to rent an apartment.

This is called "communication skills". People will good communication skills will always have advantages over people without those skills. It has nothing to do with skin colour and it is not something we should care about because we don't live in a communist society and people will more skills should have advantages. Edited by TimG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you might not be employed if you weren't white

You mean like employment equity? Oh wait...

But the Chinese or Indian

There was a study done by Oreopoulos that found that people with Chinese sounding names had an employment advantage when it comes to resume acceptance for engineering jobs.

Things are a lot more nuanced than you make them out to be.

White privilege isn't something a white person would even really notice.

Does it ever occur to you that maybe you have the perception that you have due to confirmation bias?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... because the variation within groups is much larger than the variation between groups.

The danger in trying to align a mathematical concept with human behavior in this way is that there are grey areas. Anyway, nobody has access to the kind of data you would need to decide whether a statement was fair or not based on variations, etc.

The easiest way to assess whether or not to make such a statement is to follow rules of courtesy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hernanday your pronouncement: "Sorry if you are white in Canada, you have white privilege. Simple as that." is in fact an example of:

1-someone trying to impose black privilege;

2-someone engaging in a bigoted stereotype;

3-someone who assumes skin colour automatically brands people as thinking in a certain way.

Your stereotype is:

1-illogical;

2-without any basis other than your own subjective prejudice.

Here let me put it simply-your words and your opinions are bigoted.

Save it, been there done that.

Anyone black or white try burn your cross on my lawn I don't give a damn how black they are I'm gonna take that cross and perform a colonoscopy with it on them.

Peace and love.

Edited by Rue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, nobody has access to the kind of data you would need to decide whether a statement was fair or not based on variations, etc.

We have lots of statistics that show variations between different groups of humans. I can't think of any examples where the overlap of distributions was not large enough to make it impossible to apply differences in means to any individuals in the groups. Can you provide one?

The easiest way to assess whether or not to make such a statement is to follow rules of courtesy.

And the rule of courtesy is you should not insult people by saying they have benefited personally from differences in statistical means when the distributions have large variances. And that does not even address the causality issue: i.e. even if white skinned people have collectively better outcomes that does not show there is any causal relationship. Edited by TimG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Utter nonsense!!! I personally know tons of people that are not white that are way more successful than I, or many "whites" I know are. They live in better neighborhoods, live in nicer homes, drive nicer cars, take more vacations, etc. etc. When debating the refugee/immigrant topics I see people from the left arguing how well many of them have done since coming to Canada. How could they ever have done well with all the "white privilege" that oppresses them every day. Yet another example of the hypocrisy from the left.

"White privilege" is just another myth created by the left so they can thump their moral superiority chests. End of story as far as I'm concerned.

So because someone else can over come white privilege or because someone white fails it means there is no white privilege? Do you understand that there was blatant on the books racist laws during the 1800s and 1900s in the united states yet there were legions of poor whites and plenty of rich originals? In fact on average the originals in the major cities were richer than the poor whites in the cities because a large degree of them owned businesses of very basic products. By your logic there was no white privilege in the 1950s because Samuel Fuller, african american ceo of the fuller company, had the equivalent of 180 million dollars of sales a year. James Forten was a free African American man who became a multi-millionaire during the 1700s and 1800s, would you have me believe well there was no white privilege then either?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because it does not exist. You cannot take an aggregate analysis and apply them to individuals because the variation within groups is much larger than the variation between groups. From a methodological perspective you are doing exactly what people who look at IQ distributions and claim that blacks are less intelligent. You are peddling racism.

This is called "communication skills". People will good communication skills will always have advantages over people without those skills. It has nothing to do with skin colour and it is not something we should care about because we don't live in a communist society and people will more skills should have advantages.

White privilege does exist. Why would white privilege mean every white has to be living like donald trump?People who look at IQ scores ignore the scores showing whites with half the intelligence.

It is not about skills here, it is a question of white skin privilege.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean like employment equity? Oh wait...

There was a study done by Oreopoulos that found that people with Chinese sounding names had an employment advantage when it comes to resume acceptance for engineering jobs.

Things are a lot more nuanced than you make them out to be.

Does it ever occur to you that maybe you have the perception that you have due to confirmation bias?

Employment equity was created by whites who acknowledge the reality and listened to the experts that white privilege is real.

Link to the study. I suspect it was usa? And that is just one job, what about chinese being denied housing for accents as found in the star?

It occurs to me the leading experts on race have come to a conclusion white privilege is real from Tim Wise to Jane Elliot or Dr Ron Walters, who is widely considered to be the foremost expert on race in America.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hernanday your pronouncement: "Sorry if you are white in Canada, you have white privilege. Simple as that." is in fact an example of:

1-someone trying to impose black privilege;

2-someone engaging in a bigoted stereotype;

3-someone who assumes skin colour automatically brands people as thinking in a certain way.

Your stereotype is:

1-illogical;

2-without any basis other than your own subjective prejudice.

Here let me put it simply-your words and your opinions are bigoted.

Save it, been there done that.

Anyone black or white try burn your cross on my lawn I don't give a damn how black they are I'm gonna take that cross and perform a colonoscopy with it on them.

Peace and love.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_privilege

Check yourself.

White privilege (or white skin privilege) is a term for societal privileges that benefit white people in Western countries beyond what is commonly experienced by non-white people under the same social, political, or economic circumstances.[note 1] According to McIntosh and Lee, whites in a society considered culturally a part of the Western world enjoy advantages that non-whites do not experience.[1] The term denotes both obvious and less obvious passive advantages that white persons may not recognize they have, which distinguishes it from overt bias or prejudice.[2] These include cultural affirmations of one's own worth; presumed greater social status; and freedom to move, buy, work, play, and speak freely.[1] The effects can be seen in professional, educational, and personal contexts.[3] The concept of white privilege also implies the right to assume the universality of one's own experiences, marking others as different or exceptional while perceiving oneself as normal.[4][5]

Academic perspectives such as critical race theory and whiteness studies use the concept of "white privilege" to analyze how racism and racialized societies affect the lives of white people.

And there are a bunch of reference from university textbooks.

This is not a stereotype, it is a scientifically documented phenomena that is recorded and published to millions of people all over the world by professors from world class institutions. Bigotry would require hate, I don't hate anyone, I reported a scientific fact. It would be like saying the sun is hot is bigoted. If you read what I wrote you would have seen were I said its what you do with your white privilege which is the real determinant of the person. So I never branded anyone a certain way. It is actually you with your euro-khazarian -jew privilege who created the straw man of all whites bad.

A white person who tries to deny their privilege or defer is precisely as thee study describes, simply in denial and behaving childishly because they have been caught and are angry so attempt to lash out. The real mature adults admit they have privilege and come from a privileged lifestyle and behave responsibly from that. Its like the difference between the billionaire kids like Donald Trump who pretend they worked for what they have when daddy gave them $100 million trust fund and multimillionaires like JFK who was just as rich when inflation adjusted but said yeah I am rich and come from a privilege lifestyle but I am not going to deny that I got into Harvard with a B- average because my daddy was a made man. But instead I will use my privilege as a white male to help others and level the playing field.

Black privilege does not exist. I don't have a stereotype, I do have facts and evidence though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...