Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   White Privilege
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


(1)
Message 199 of 276 (778889)
02-25-2016 7:44 PM
Reply to: Message 197 by New Cat's Eye
02-25-2016 7:05 PM


Re: some privilege
Thanks for the link, it helped.
PErsonal experience time, it's Richard Dawkins' fault.
Well he and some others.
See, they issued a rallying call.
And the atheists rallied.
Then split into groups to work on their areas of interest. Some groups turned their attentions inwards. Naturally this group contained a lot of sociology, feminism and other equality studies types as that's what they like to do.
For a while the atheists felt morally superior but these people tried to burst that bubble by pointing out that atheism's public representation seems to be very white, pretty old, and overwhelmingly male. That many of the smug atheists who thought that publicly breaking with God was the end and they got to look down on the silly believers were young white males. And when minority voices spoke up, there was a lot of pushback and the privilege conversation got started.
Angry young white male atheists have, in general, privilege over middle aged black female atheists when it comes to having their views represented, their concerns and social needs met and so on. The minorities and those who had studied this, pointed out that this is the kind of thing those same angry young white men were smugly criticising insular religious communities for. The AYWM grew angrier and manlier (though probably not whiter), and the whole misogyny argument erupted.
These days, you are likely going to run into people who have been arguing about these issues for a half a decade or more. You know well enough that evolutionists in that position often become cranky and uncivil when they hear the same damn long dealt with objections time and again. It's like they feel they have to speak to every single white man individually but having the same discussion, rather than the white men just reading some academia or academic summaries on the subject. (it's not just white men, but to pretend they aren't disproportionally the egregious offenders would be kind of blind)
So then I don't want to use the concept.
Most people don't. But since there are others that do use it, it's good to know what it means and why it is used.
I'm not suspicious of it, I just don't like the approach.
I was thrown by your use of the terms 'shell game', 'dishonesty', 'con'
I'm not ignorant of my "privilege" and I've yet to be in a situation where I need to check it. So I guess I'm good already.
Sometimes you can say something which rhetorically shoots you in the foot. Here is an example.
On the one hand, maybe you have, but you have had the privilege to not have live with the consequences.
And if you haven't, you must be very privileged indeed. Very few people of any race or gender manage to escape benefiting from their race unconsciously and to have such confidence in your beliefs that you are 'good already' is a privilege I cannot even imagine having. It must be wonderful to rest assured in the knowledge that nobody has favoured you over someone equal or better, just because of your race.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 197 by New Cat's Eye, posted 02-25-2016 7:05 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 200 by New Cat's Eye, posted 02-25-2016 8:24 PM Modulous has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


(1)
Message 201 of 276 (778893)
02-25-2016 9:10 PM
Reply to: Message 200 by New Cat's Eye
02-25-2016 8:24 PM


Re: some privilege
Yeah that's definitely something I don't want to be a part of.
Nobody was asking you to. I was just explaining factors that I am aware of that help explain why you have seen it's usage increase.
That just dissuades me from using the concept. That's what I'm talking about with the dishonestly. You're not being straight forward; you're employing a technique, or using a trick.
Yes, that was a debate tactic. I wasn't being dishonest. There really has been a terrible history surrounding race. My debate strategy has nothing to do with whether or not white people have privilege and how white people should handle it's existence if it does. {abe: just to be clear, I'm saying that what strategies I, Mod, adopt to persuade Hyro of the difficulty of the moral position he is in don't have any impact the reality of the subject at hand; the alternate reading is clearly strange} Have you considered the possibility that you are looking for rationalizations to avoid worrying about it. As a white person, it is your privilege to be able to do that without real consequence - after all.
Why else would you dismiss something like this on the basis of 'some people argue in a way I don't like'?
It's just that that's not my fault, so I don't have to feel any guilt over it. Right?
Right. As I've said numerous times.
quote:
There was nothing in my text that suggests you should feel responsible.
quote:
And when you said {that must mean I am complicit} the last time, I made it explicit that this was not the case.
quote:
I am not saying you are culpable.
quote:
my point wasn't that you ARE culpable
quote:
This doesn't have to be anybody's *fault*.
quote:
I explicitly said "There was nothing in my text that suggests you should feel responsible.", but you seem to want to whine about how I am trying to make you feel guilty.
I AM NOT TRYING TO MAKE YOU FEEL GUILTY
NOR AM I STATING YOU ARE GUILTY
ANY GUILT YOU DO HAPPEN TO FEEL IS NOT MY DOING
On the other hand, as a benefactor of those privileges it might be wise to not be that proverbial rich person who suggests the peasants 'eat cake' but presumably in a smaller social scale than in that story.
Like a certain someone who blithely suggested that for minorities to do well, they just need to embrace the culture...in a conversation about European-Americans and African-Americans. As if black people are not an integral part of American culture.
I was just saying that I've never been in a situation where my privilege needed to be checked, because I'm already aware of it and don't offend people by it.
Fantastic news. From point 2:
quote:
What you need to realize is that we all have privilege to some degree: white privilege, male privilege, heterosexual privilege, etc. The hardest thing is to do is to get over your instinct to fight and say, But I’m not like that!
Sure, it may have happened and I wasn't aware of it, but I've never been in a situation where I've actually needed to.
Are you sure? I mean the entire point is that it's fiendishly difficult to notice when you yourself are acting with unconscious privilege, but easier to see when others are doing it.
Consult again the list in Message 169
Can you be sure in every single conversation you've ever had you haven't unconsciously made implicit assumptions in your speech, behaviour etc based around what you regard as 'the normal experience' without realizing that you were around people for whom that is not a common experience and actually a bit of a sore point?
Like, have you ever talked to a person of another race about problems in their neighbourhood and suggested they just move elsewhere?
quote:
If I should need to move, I can be pretty sure of renting or purchasing housing in an area which I can afford and in which I would want to live.
Maybe you hit a nerve with that person, unless you don't interact with others it's probably impossible that you have not made any such errors. It's like confirmation bias, if you are experiencing it, it can be really difficult to notice.
By "being good", I mean that I'm already following the principles in that link. I'm not a dick to people in-person, not even ignorantly.
Assuming you are right - ultimately, you acknowledge your privileges when they arise and you treat others around you without the assumption that they share them. But you don't want to have anything to do with the concept of privilege?
You do realize that as people of the white race seem to say 'But I'm not like that' and therefore they don't need to address the issue, it causes anxiety in people of other races (or whatever other privilege relationships) that the things they are concerned about are not being taken seriously because most people think they generally good so there seems to be no mood for change, even though something is amiss. So by making this kind of declaration - once more, you may be shooting yourself in the proverbial foot.
Either way - as long as you are trying not to be a dick, that's a good start. Maybe next time if someone asks you to 'check your privilege' you might have a kinder, more receptive response that doesn't necessarily accept guilt while simultaneously treating the concern seriously. Such as 'if I am exhibiting privilege I am oblivious, please help me understand'.
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by New Cat's Eye, posted 02-25-2016 8:24 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 205 by New Cat's Eye, posted 02-26-2016 10:35 AM Modulous has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 203 of 276 (778901)
02-26-2016 3:41 AM
Reply to: Message 202 by Hyroglyphx
02-26-2016 2:07 AM


Re: the history and mathematics of prejudice
The problem here, Mod, is that you are only looking at one possible variable here as the reason.
It's almost like it's the topic, or something.
Do I think that systemic racism has contributed towards black people per capita earning less than whites? Absolutely.
OK.
But would you likewise conclude that there is an unfair advantage for Asians knowing that, per capita, they not only make more money than anyone else, but also per capita get better grades?
Let's be frank, trying to shift blame is silly when blame isn't being pointed = but your insistence on talking about non-white-privilege in a thread about white-privilege looks exactly like that.
Other racial privileges exist. Which ones is not the topic.
I only ask because if we look at your theory, it only includes oppression and tyranny as the sole, possible culprit.
Nope.
And there are many possible variables to account for that: One is that, yes, there is a history of oppression that negatively impacts the black community. Another would be a culture that promotes or fosters self-destructive behavior.
What culture would that be?
African-American culture.
How does African-American culture differ from European-American culture?
Would you agree that an African-American is born into a culture that has been held back for centuries by white people? Would you agree that is not their fault? Your blaming black people for what they've inherited would be as crazy as being blaming white people for what they inherited. Which I am not doing. But you seem to be getting quite close to your version with this argument carefully phrased as a question.
If I am African-American and I am poor, what is the most likely reason? That my parents in the 60s, 70s, and 80s had a difficult time with employment and housing and were not able to participate fully in pursuit of the American dream? That when they were born, their parents had had it worse? And so on going back generations?
Tell me, does your hypothesis have an explanation as to why if you send out two identical CVs, one with a white sounding name and one with a black sounding name...the white sounding named CV gets more interviews? Does the black CV not apply itself or something?
Ah, so in other words, punishing the son for the great-great-great grandfather's sins?
My question, in case you had forgotten was do you prefer to do this, or would you prefer to punish the son for the great-great-great grandfather's punishment?
Both are obviously unfair. I said this from the outset. For some reason you get very energized when someone suggests discriminating against white people but its more apathy, denials and victim blaming when we're talking about discriminating against blacks.
Your solution is to discriminate against whites on the sole basis that they happen to be white to help black people on the sole basis that they so happen to be black?
Your solution seems to be to discriminate against black on the sole basis they happen to be black to help white people on the sole basis that they so happen to be white.
Because when you engage in denials as you have, you are arguing for the status quo. Which is discrimination against black people. That's my point.
That doesn't strike you as ironically racist?
That's my point.
The same was the case for the Jew in Germany. But the generation that perpetrated that heinous crime is dead and gone.
I really can't figure out what to criticize.
1) That Jewish oppression in Germany was only for one generation
2) That Jewish oppression has ended
3) That a generation of oppression is a reasonable comparator to the African-American experience
Are modern-Germans expected to carry the burden of their ancestors?
That does seem to be the case, yes.
he Nazi's bombed Great Britain. Should they pay you restitution even though contemporary Germans had nothing to do with it nor were you personally a victim?
No. Although my ancestors fled from the mainland to Britain during that time, so actually it benefited me in at least one way.
At what point does it end?
Psst. It's not about blame.
It's about acknowledging privileges given to us because of our race, not earned through character.
Call me crazy, but I hold people responsible for what they actually have done, not what their ancestors may or may not have been a part of.
Are you done?
Good. I hope so. Now, given this isn't about responsibility - how about you try and veer towards what I'm talking about?
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 202 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-26-2016 2:07 AM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 204 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-26-2016 5:11 AM Modulous has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


(1)
Message 206 of 276 (778921)
02-26-2016 2:49 PM
Reply to: Message 204 by Hyroglyphx
02-26-2016 5:11 AM


Re: the history and mathematics of prejudice
Yes, and perhaps in some instances it is a mischaracterization.
This is true of every characterisation in the universe.
. Again, it was you who stated "minorities," but you shifted to "African-Americans" after showing you how minorities aren't wrapped up in this system of oppression.
For at least the second time, you showed no such thing. You asserted it. There's a difference.
Furthermore, there is nothing odd about starting a debate with a general position which for the purposes of argument becomes more specific in discussion with a small number of people. This is normal and the fact that you think this means something in your favour somehow is most peculiar.
I didn't 'shift' when I was 'shown' otherwise. I focussed on the most glaring and obvious privilege situation in the USA because I was trying to persuade a USAian about privilege. Discussing subtle cases is less persuasive than the obvious ones.
Now it's off limits because it undermines your point about how privileged white people are.
I am happy to talk about white privilege in relation to Arab-Americans, Latin-Americans etc if you really want to. Rather than discuss hills, slopes, gradients, and bumps - I think it important to clear up that Mountains really do exist if someone denies even this. My complaint was that you want to talk about non-white privilege. Which is off topic. Go start your own topic on Asian privilege if you are so keen to discuss it.
How does African-American culture differ from European-American culture?
One thing that comes to mind is gangster rap. And while that is a sub-culture within the overall culture, I'm sure you would agree that it is glorifying something that is very self-destructive.
Congratulations on spectacularly missing/avoiding the point. You are now pointing to art and saying that is why Black people are doing poorly. It's foolish at best and also white people have various rap, including gangster rap in their culture. Check out the charts from the 70s through to the 90s. Those tapes and LPs weren't only bought by black people. Furthermore, white culture have grunge and death metal, for which similar arguments could be made.
Would you agree that an African-American is born into a culture that has been held back for centuries by white people? Would you agree that is not their fault? Would you agree that their music, from gospel to rap is music born of poverty and oppression? Blues, gospel soul or rap - can you not hear how social situations of the artists in question are informing their art?
quote:
Fuck the police coming straight from the underground
A young nigga got it bad cause I'm brown
And not the other color so police think
They have the authority to kill a minority
Fuck that shit, cause I ain't the one
For a punk motherfucker with a badge and a gun
To be beating on, and thrown in jail
We can go toe to toe in the middle of a cell
Fucking with me cause I'm a teenager
With a little bit of gold and a pager
Searching my car, looking for the product
Thinking every nigga is selling narcotics
NWA, Fuck the Police, Straight Outta Compton, 1988
If I am African-American and I am poor, what is the most likely reason? That my parents in the 60s, 70s, and 80s had a difficult time with employment and housing and were not able to participate fully in pursuit of the American dream? That when they were born, their parents had had it worse? And so on going back generations? Or do you rather think they had all the same opportunities and advantages as you but the pissed it away for some reason associated with their culture?
Yes, because people stick to what they know. It's not merely "black-sounding names," it's inclusive of most unique names.
That's fine. I look forward to you showing me the study that shows the effect is basically the same. Even if it is, it doesn't actually affect the point. White people still have the privilege having white sounding names more commonly than black people do. White people have the privilege of being able to use names from their own, mostly European, heritage without worrying about their child's future if they do so.
Now, is that very superficial and well, bullshit, to judge a person on their name? Yeah, I totally agree. But this emphasizes that this phenomenon encompasses everyone. It isn't specific to black people.
A fact that has never been in disagreement. Everybody has privileges somebody else hasn't, but likewise everybody lacks privileges somebody else has.
For some reason you get very energized when someone suggests discriminating against white people but its more apathy, denials and victim blaming when we're talking about discriminating against blacks.
Is it that I get energized when someone suggests discriminating against whites or do I think it's bullshit to punish innocent people period?
The only way in which this serves as a rebuttal to what I said is if you think black people are not innocent.
What is it exactly that I am in denial about?
Really? You've forgotten what it is you are arguing about now? White Privilege. You deny either its existence or its effects.
Are Germans today responsible for Jews today? Yes or no?
Sorry, the question is tricky parse.
Do we owe the existence of Jews to Germans? No
Are Germans responsible for their actions against Jews? Yes, same as anybody.
Are Germans morally culpable for the actions of their ancestors? No.
If the answer is no, then how is that any different with the situation in America?
It is not. How many times would you like me to say that this is not about holding contemporary white people responsible for historical white people's actions? I suppose you could I argue that I am suggesting that contemporary white people are responsible for the direction contemporary white culture goes in.
Maybe I just don't see things the way you do, but I certainly don't see how I'm privileged.
This is the standard position. It takes a little effort, and sometimes asking people who know you - especially other races, the disabled, the mentally ill etc., to understand.
I don't know you so it's difficult to really be specific and even if I managed to be perfectly right you could argue it and I'd have no way to disprove it. So here are some suggestions

Possible privileges you may have or had

1) You were born in America. This is a privilege. Most people are born in Indonesia, China, India and the like. Being born in America is therefore to be considered a huge privilege. The advantages afforded to you by the job market, the healthcare system, the military, the economy. These are all things that you did not earn, you were born with them - more or less.
2) You were born white. You've probably had very limited amount of stop and searches, police encounters when they occur are usually polite and cordial. The police are less likely to approach you with their gun aimed at you yelling various commands at you. It is likely that your high school experience didn't involve considerable amounts of exclusion and bullying by unenlightened children
3) You are neurotypical. You haven't spent life seen teenager years assaulted by hallucinations and delusions confirming your worthlessness and how disgusting and useless you are. You haven't had to realize that this state of being is likely to never be cured and you will feel like hell for your entire life, probably until your ultimate suicide - which you believe you're such a failure you'll not succeed at. You never have to worry about being tortured over whether you can trust yourself, whether others know and if they do whether are taking you seriously.
4) You are heterosexual. When you were a teenager, success or fail, you were confident that telling someone you found celebrity x or schoolmate y attractive would at worst only draw months of mockery rather than 5 years of beatings and ostracisation. You haven't needed to worry about becoming associated with a disease, being thought of as a disease, thought of as a paedophile, an zoophile, been denied adoption rights, being spat at, murdered, raped, etc etc just because the person you loved was a woman.
5) Your gender and sex align. You don't have always feel clumsy, ugly, ungainly, too short, too tall while being socially pressured into wearing clothes that exacerbate these feelings. You haven't had to spend time with a psychiatrist trying understand the nature of gender and sex and how this relates to your feelings, you've escaped life of feeling like a freak worrying that the only cure for that feeling is to go through a period of telling all your friends and family and all strangers you meet that you're a freak. You haven't fallen in love with someone and wondered if you left it too late to discuss how you feel about certain items of clothing. You haven't had the love of your life discover your taste in clothing and makeup choices in way that was shocking to her resulting in her insulting you to your core and a messy and humiliating divorce.
6) You are male. You haven't had a lifetime of people warning you about rape in some fashion every time you step outside alone, and you haven't had live under the same degree of risk of rape. You don't have worry about getting pregnant. You don't have menstrual cycles. You don't have spend $50-$100 on extra items of underwear, and the associated back aches, breast matter pains. If you like sex, you haven't had to worry about your reputation nearly as much. Casual sexual harrassment, groping and lewd comments if you've experienced are probably rare enough that you can remember each one specifically. The President has always been your sex/gender. As is most of the rest of government. The churches you attended were run by your sex.
For one thing, it makes a mockery of what I have been able to accomplish in my life, as if everything I have was handed to me on a silver platter or that it was at the expense of someone else.
I'm sure you worked hard for it.
Imagine how much harder schizophrenic black Nigerian immigrant transsexual women would have had to work to achieve what you did.
You honestly think it would be equally as hard for them? In Texas? You don't think they might have a lot more challenges to deal with? What if they were paralyzed?
Is the fact that man with no legs climbed Everest more incredible than a man with two working legs? Do you feel that by suggesting the man with no legs had to deal with additional challenges, making the accomplishment even sweeter and perhaps even greater...diminishes the able bodied man?
I don't think so.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 204 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-26-2016 5:11 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 209 of 276 (778925)
02-26-2016 3:35 PM
Reply to: Message 205 by New Cat's Eye
02-26-2016 10:35 AM


Re: some privilege
I don't mean that you're being dishonest with the existence of white privilege, just that tactic is.
Like, there's a tacit insinutation of fault that, when responded to, is immediately discounted with explaining the lack of responsibility.
Huh? There is no tacit insinuation of fault. If you feel that, I didn't put it there.
It's a perfectly simple question, shaved down to two races and some simple facts. If we decide a fair system is impossible, we are left with building an unfair one. We know the history and how it affects the people of today. Black people were denied so much for so long they have had to scrabble out of poverty through brazenly inequal situation and those black people today are still on average considerably behind the curve of white folks.
So do you choose to further disadvantage the disadvantaged?
Or do you choose to disadvantage the advantaged?
If you choose to further disadvantage a group of people with such a history of being disadvantaged then at THAT point guilt maybe appropriate.
If you choose to pull white people back slightly for a while so that black folks can progress by a greater degree for longer....it might be unfair but it seems to me to be preferable.
If you think that pointing out that black people have been disadvantaged, by the very race of people choosing whether to disadvantage them further is a dishonest tactic then fine.
It's kind of sad that you would rather focus on rhetorical style than the contents of the points being raised to the point of dismissing an entire area of academic study because of it. Furthermore, you will not be able to characterize my discussion as primarily pursuing emotional appeals (which are fine in human discourse - 'I have a dream', 'Ask not what your country...'. 'We band of brothers....') of this nature. For the most part EvC has decided my writing is rather cold and insensitive, or logical and pragmatic depending on your stance. I think that characterisation describes my contribution here. For all the discussion about it, it was a few lines of text among my many in this thread.
And the person I was addressing? Just so we're clear, has blamed black people, for their difficulties getting employment - citing that other races hate them so there must be something in it. Has pointed out that their culture's art, symbolized by gangster rap, is evidence of self-destructive character of African-American culture....all he has said about white privilege comes down to that he doesn't have it and he shouldn't feel guilty.
But it's my debating tactic that turns you off. OK.
Now, the academic concept doesn't look too bad to me, but really the only exposure to this concept I've had is on the internet, where the concept is being used in a way that really turns me off.
Then learn about it and win arguments against people not doing it right. It's rich pickings on either side of the debate. I'm guessing this is quite common when technical terms enter common vernacular. If you are successful you can contribute towards correcting misconceptions and changing the way it is used. Win-win.
Incidentally - that is exactly how I started debating the concept.
Well, it's literally never been brought up to me in RL
That's hardly unexpected. Just as when someone's obliviousness offends you in fleshtime conversations, most of the time you probably decide making a big deal out of it would damage the relationship more than the occasionally inadvertent offensive comment. If you are in a minority position, that pressure is probably just that bit greater.
I just realize that there are disadvantages that black people have that I don't have to deal with.
The fun thing about English is the way you can move words around to express the same state of affairs.
quote:
I just realize that there are privileges I have that black people don't.
It's actually more succinct, for what its worth. As I said - if you want to avoid certain words you can. You can ensure every sentence is structured in terms of synonyms for 'disadvantages' if you like. It's a little negative, a little limiting - but it's your speech.
Well, it's never happened yet, and I don't feel any guilt.
Nobody has asked you to check your privilege?
Check your privilege!
Oh, I guess you just lost that privilege, never mind
There is no reason to feel any guilt about having privileges. Nor is there any shame in having disadvantages.
The only shame around this that I might try and dish out is on those that refuse to acknowledge their privileges, or if you prefer, others disadvantages.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 205 by New Cat's Eye, posted 02-26-2016 10:35 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 210 by New Cat's Eye, posted 02-26-2016 4:14 PM Modulous has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 212 of 276 (778933)
02-26-2016 5:22 PM
Reply to: Message 210 by New Cat's Eye
02-26-2016 4:14 PM


Re: some privilege
I don't feel it, I see it. And it's not just you.
It's the general way the concept is argued on the internet.
Consider it constructive criticism; the standard way of arguing against white people about thier privileges contains some counter-productive rhetoric.
I've been discussing this almost as long as I've been discussing evolution. I understand the counter-productive rhetoric.
But reminding someone that if they say 'black people' in answer to my dilemma what it is they are saying. They are saying 'let's be the ones to choose to disadvantage the already disadvantaged because our ancestors disadvantaged them', with a stark reminder of the magnitude of that disadvantaging.
I don't think a moral argument can be made to support this if the alternative is to say 'let's disadvantage the people who were advantaged by having ancestors who disadvantaged others who will now be advantaged to a greater degree than the the people we will be disadvantaging'.
Again - both are unfair. Apparently you'd prefer to rail against my terrible crimes rather than deal with the moral argument. Because white men's feelings are the thing I should spend most of my effort here to preserve, right?
After all, I should be sensitive to the fact that white men, especially American white men have had race issues thrust upon them without their consent and its not their fault! Not their fault. They aren't guilty. And they can't talk about the subject until the person their opponent puts it in a 24pt font, prints it on glossy paper and mails it to every person in the world.
I haven't even addressed that question.
Apparently you would now rather focus on how I've hurt some white people's feelings than the topic.
It's actually more succinct, for what its worth.
Maybe by word count,
succinct: marked by compact precise expression without wasted words
but what we're talking about is:
quote:
Person A being deprived of something in favour of Person B because Person B has something Person A does not would be an example of Person B's privilege in relation to Person A.
You adopted that format when you completely misunderstood privilege. This was me correcting your misunderstanding using the format you chose. Makes you kind of look bad when you try and win an argument in this fashion.
Person A has a disadvantage.
Or: 'Person B has privilege.' Again we adopt a certain parsimony of word count, for what it's worth.
So what am I supposed to actually do?
I already told you. As the slogan implies, you should first engage in introspection to see if you can puzzle it out yourself. If not, try a 'kind, receptive response that doesn't necessarily accept guilt while simultaneously treating the concern seriously. Such as 'if I am exhibiting privilege I am oblivious, please help me understand'.'
Here's a clue: Look at what you just said. If it makes any hidden assumptions about life experiences that others can conceivably have missed out on due to something out of their control, that's probably a good avenue to piece things together.
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 210 by New Cat's Eye, posted 02-26-2016 4:14 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 245 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-01-2016 3:14 PM Modulous has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


(3)
Message 214 of 276 (778954)
02-27-2016 8:25 AM
Reply to: Message 213 by Hyroglyphx
02-27-2016 2:17 AM


Re: the history and mathematics of prejudice
Oh, sorry, but everything I have is what I've earned myself. Maybe mommy and daddy paid for you, but they didn't pay for me.
I'm sorry to hear that. You must have had a hell of an interesting childhood. What kind of vocation must a pre-vocal child endure so as to pay for its own food and clothing and medicine and healthcare?
Stop spinning such a bullshit narrative that doesn't reflect reality. Almost no one "goes to bed hungry" in this day and age, and if they did, then they had shitty parents.
Why would they be shitty parents? Is it because they didn't let their 18 month old get a job so he can pay for his own food?
But this is not only an empirical claim you are making here. But a claim that is notoriously wrong.
quote:
In 2011, child poverty reached record high levels, with 16.7 million children living in food insecure households, about 35% more than 2007 levels.[16] A 2013 UNICEF report ranked the U.S. as having the second highest relative child poverty rates in the developed world.
...
There were about 643,000 sheltered and unsheltered homeless people nationwide in January 2009. Almost two-thirds stayed in an emergency shelter or transitional housing program and the other third were living on the street, in an abandoned building, or another place not meant for human habitation. About 1.56 million people, or about 0.5% of the U.S. population, used an emergency shelter or a transitional housing program between October 1, 2008 and September 30, 2009.[18] Around 44% of homeless people are employed.
quote:
The US Census declared that in 2014 14.8% of the general population lived in poverty:[43]
10.1% of all white non-Hispanic persons
12.0% of all Asian persons
23.6% of all Hispanic persons (of any race)
26.2% of all black persons.
quote:
In 2013, child poverty reached record high levels in the U.S., with 16.7 million children living in food insecure households. Many of the neighborhoods these children lack basic produce and nutritious food.
quote:
Income levels vary along racial/ethnic lines: 21% of all children in the United States live in poverty, about 46% of black children and 40% of Latino children.[70] The poverty rate is 9.9% for black married couples, and only 30% of black children are born to married couples (see Marriage below). The poverty rate for native born and naturalized whites is identical (9.6%). On the other hand, the poverty rate for naturalized blacks is 11.8% compared to 25.1% for native born blacks, suggesting race alone does not explain income disparity.
quote:
In 2009 the number of people who were in poverty was approaching 1960s levels that led to the national War on Poverty.[10] In 2011 extreme poverty in the United States, meaning households living on less than $2 per day before government benefits, was double 1996 levels at 1.5 million households, including 2.8 million children
Poverty in the United States - Wikipedia
But yeah, shitty parents. And you worked hard to earn your parents. The parents that didn't feed, clothe or shelter you.
My standard of living is less than the median income.
Which median income?
quote:
The Census Bureau estimated real median household income at $53,657 for 2014 and $54,462 in 2013. Household income varies by race, with Asians the highest in 2014 at over $74,000 and African Americans the lowest around $35,000
For over 25s, the personal median is about $30K for white males. A little over $20k for black males.
The amount of anyone killed by police is not even 1%.
The probability is low yes.
Then again some people are afraid of being killed by terrorists. So much so they'll support measures to restrict everyones freedoms, inconvenience everyones travel, spend billions on military actions, kill thousands and thousands and thousands of people.
How many US citizens die because of terrorism? Difficult to be certain. What counts as terrorism, how closely associated should we allow to count. But most estimates I've seen put it in the order of magnitude of 10 per year.
How many US citizens are killed by police? Strangely, the government doesn't keep count. Citizens have tried, it's in the order of magnitude of 1,000.
Black people's mortality rate is a bit over 7ppm (people per million). Whites have less than 3ppm.
Lists of killings by law enforcement officers in the United States - Wikipedia
But I'm curious why you think that all or even the majority of shootings by police aren't justified.
Unfortunately, since police testimony is pretty unreliable (they are human and it would be strange for a human shooter to say things that will likely lose them their job and or liberty if they can avoid doing so) and since nobody is actually counting. It's tricky to say. Estimates suggest about 20%+ were unarmed.
Drilling down into the unarmed data further we see that in 2015, 224 people were unarmed when they died. 75 of these were black. 102 were white. Given there are almost 6 times more white people than black people in the USA, that would concur that blacks should fear negative or even fatal police intervention more than whites, don't you think?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 213 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-27-2016 2:17 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 221 of 276 (779000)
02-28-2016 9:31 AM
Reply to: Message 218 by Hyroglyphx
02-28-2016 1:08 AM


Re: the history and mathematics of prejudice
I actually don't think that Asians have unfair advantage. I am pointing out that if Mod's reasoning is accurate, then the only logical conclusion is that Asians must have an unfair advantage given the results.
Therefore Asian Privilege.
OK fine, let's accept this so that we can get you to move on with the argument.
Given that Asian Privilege exists, when we are deciding to build a system that must discriminate against either white people or black people (to the advantage of the other), which people should we choose to discriminate against?
I have no fucking clue what Asian Privilege has to do with this, but you seem to think it's important so have at it.
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 218 by Hyroglyphx, posted 02-28-2016 1:08 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 232 of 276 (779076)
02-29-2016 3:08 PM
Reply to: Message 228 by Jon
02-29-2016 8:08 AM


Re: the history and mathematics of prejudice
Those questions favored kids familiar with English culture.
You would agree than there are subcultures, some quite significant, including an African-American culture?
I don't know about nursery rhymes, but I expect there may be some differences in the kinds of songs, poems, rhymes etc they grow up learning compared with European-Americans.
You and I speak English, but I once took an test from an American school when I was about 13 years old and I failed miserably.
English schools didn't diagram sentences, so I simply couldn't attempt this stuff.
I had no idea what a dime or a nickel was worth (I knew one was 5 and the other 10 but it was just guess work).
To name two things that I remember on that test.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by Jon, posted 02-29-2016 8:08 AM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 234 by Jon, posted 02-29-2016 6:00 PM Modulous has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 235 of 276 (779089)
02-29-2016 7:11 PM
Reply to: Message 234 by Jon
02-29-2016 6:00 PM


Re: the history and mathematics of prejudice
In a general sense, sure.
But now we're straying from the topic.
I fail to see how agreeing that European-American and African-American culture have differences is offtopic when you were trying to claim homogenousness. We all agree black people are not doing worse because of the colour of their skin, but the claim by Freedle is that the different experiences of African-American children in general provides them with a slightly different toolset than the European-American and that this contributes to their poor test performance.
Take verbal tests, based on spelling and grammar. A student who speaks African American Vernacular English in a school of people speaking African American Vernacular English may make errors in grammar and spelling that European-American English speakers would be much less likely to.
If this is true, we could say that being white maximizes ones chances of not speaking African American Vernacular English while being black maximizes your chance of speaking African American Vernacular English. Therefore being white affords you an unearned privilege in relation to certain tests.
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 234 by Jon, posted 02-29-2016 6:00 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 236 by Jon, posted 02-29-2016 9:57 PM Modulous has replied
 Message 238 by Hyroglyphx, posted 03-01-2016 1:21 AM Modulous has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 242 of 276 (779148)
03-01-2016 9:36 AM
Reply to: Message 238 by Hyroglyphx
03-01-2016 1:21 AM


Re: the history and mathematics of prejudice
I'm not seeing how the results might be any different than comparing the Southern United States with the Northern United States. The Northern states probably test better on average.
Probably.
Would that indicate racism
It would indicate that being born in certain regions affords you privileges not afforded those born in other regions.
Since north/south is not typically strongly correlated to race in either of our countries I don't think we could suppose institutional or systematic racism (which is not necessarily deliberate) or even actual deliberate racism in the minds of actors in positions of power - as an explanation.
The African-American culture is strongly correlated with race. And there is a known causal relationship too.
Are you referring to Ebonics?
Sort of. Ebonics is a colloquial and imprecise term that carries all sorts of things with it - its meaning differs so widely between speakers as to render the word useless in our context.
Except that proper English is taught in all schools
You guys say 'I wrote Tony' or 'Write me'. Proper English spoken by the English would say 'I wrote to Tony' or 'Write to me'. You spell things deliberately wrong to differentiate yourself from proper English. It's called American-English.
A person whose primary language is American-English who takes an exam on just English is going to make mistakes an English speaker might not make. Even if they get taught 'proper English'.
This arises because the term 'proper English' is actually kind of meaningless.
Living in Texas might maximize one's chance of using the improper conjunction of ya'll versus you'll.
You're a Texan.
I'm English.
And even I know that 'y'all' is second person plural not an alternate contraction for 'you will'. We English sometimes use 'yous' or 'youse' to mean the similar things (mostly teenagers to be honest). It means the speaker is addressing more than one person, and avoids the ambiguity of 'you' which can be specific or general.
"I'll see *you* later", an individual even if they are standing in a group
"See ya'll later", the whole group
Are Texans "underprivileged" therefore because they have modes of speech specific to their region?
Maybe it has impact, but I'm going to suppose that if this effect exists at all - that 'Ebonics' is a more significant variant of English than Texan-English is.
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 238 by Hyroglyphx, posted 03-01-2016 1:21 AM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 254 by Hyroglyphx, posted 03-02-2016 1:08 AM Modulous has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 243 of 276 (779149)
03-01-2016 9:49 AM
Reply to: Message 236 by Jon
02-29-2016 9:57 PM


Re: the history and mathematics of prejudice
When was this?
I was being economic with words, but you were referring to 'English culture' that everyone that speaks English having access too. There being different English Languages and different English Culture is kind of the important point.
We all agree black people are doing worse because of the colour of their skin
No. We do not all agree on that.
Are you working off the email copy? The post was edited to correct for the accidental dropping of the word 'not' within a couple of minutes. I'm surprised this didn't occur to you.
Despite it's name, AAVE is not unique to African Americans nor do all African Americans speak it.
I am not a moron. I realize that language is not intrinsic to race. If you try reading my words you'll not I actually said:
'being white maximizes ones chances of not speaking African American Vernacular English ' and ' being black maximizes your chance of speaking African American Vernacular English. '
Do you argue what I actually said is false? Given that we're mainly talking about a person's first/primary language.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 236 by Jon, posted 02-29-2016 9:57 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 250 by Jon, posted 03-01-2016 6:41 PM Modulous has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 246 of 276 (779185)
03-01-2016 4:25 PM
Reply to: Message 245 by New Cat's Eye
03-01-2016 3:14 PM


Re: some privilege
Then why do you continue to use it?
I disagree I am so doing.
I'm not trying to win an argument, I'm explaining to you why I don't care to use the concept.
That doesn't change what I said.
It isn't worth anything. In fact, your way is worth less to me.
As long as we agree that English allows you to use words this way. You can avoid doing so as you like.
Simplifying a complex concept into sound bites doesn't make the concept more palatable.
It's not a palatable subject.
I'm pretty sure that's part of the trick, though.
You've gone all suspicious again. It's really strange.
You need to check your privilege again. Not all of us have the luxury of caring about your moral dilemma.
Indeed. You seem really keen to focus on my presentation of the point that I made addressed to someone else in three lines...and not on the thousands of other words on the subject I've written. I wonder why you care about the bit you've gone on about?
Anyways, recall that I've admitted I don't get it, have acknowledged that I don't feel guilt, and have been asking questions to gain an understanding.
Why is acknowledging you don't feel guilt important? I really don't get why you guys insist on mentioning it all the time.
Anyway you have also criticized me for the way I made a point some time ago and insinuated that this all part of some 'trick' or 'con' that means you can simply dismiss the whole thing. So it's not just asking questions. I think I've been answering your questions rather well haven't I?
And I get met with basically "if you ain't with us, you're against us".
You even thanked me for pointing you to information that helped piece together the history of the word's usage and its recent usage explosion. And now you are waving a hand over all this as me saying this? What nonsense.
I was critcising you focussing on a small part of my contribution to criticize me, and by extension the whole damnable enterprise in this thread, to the exclusion of the content of the messages in question.
Notice how it's practically impossible for me to have not needed to check my privilege, and that privilege is something that is so elusive that I may not even notice it at all, but it really is really there.
You know what else is hard to notice? Things that don't exist and are made up.
True, but then. I've pointed it out - dozens and dozens of specific examples and everything. So you should be able to see it if you actually look.
The hardest part is knowing to look.
"No, it's not that that person has a disadvantage, it's that you have a privilege".
I told you it was exactly NOT this. Not either/or but both. Because English lets you do this, remember?
"Heads I win, tails you lose"
You're turning the tables around so that people don't consider that they need to help another person with a negative quality, but instead they need to notice and admit all the positive qualities that they themselves have.
That's actually nonsense. Sorry.
. But the approach of carelessly using rhetoric that makes people feel guilt, and then on top of that, turning that back around against them with the charge that their guilt is misplaced because you didn't mean to imply responsibility, coupled with the problem being something that they couldn't possibly have avoided, and backed up with them not noticing it not because it isn't prevalent, but because it is so elusive, well, that just sounds like a bunch of bullshit to me. I'm still not buying it.
But that's your invention, its not what happened.
And regarding my "feelings", they don't have anything to do with it. I just figure that as a wealthy white guy you would want me on your side and have been trying to explain why the approach to this problem isn't working.
Indeed. So if you have questions ask. If you want to address the dilemma I proposed, I dare you to do so. If you want to complain about cons and tricks because I happen to raise the historical facts of race relations in a moral dilemma about future race relations as a means of focussing Hyro and telegraphing to him what the horns of the dilemma are before he makes his attempt....don't bother it's really boring now. I've said all I can and you have only a handful of synonyms you can repeat.
But again, since I'm not immediately with you then I must be doing everything I can to be against you.
I don't think it is necessarily true. If is so, that's your choice.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 245 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-01-2016 3:14 PM New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 247 of 276 (779189)
03-01-2016 5:36 PM


Another pivilege checking choice
You haven't been born yet. God comes to you and says, "Congratulations, you're going to be an American. You will be born in 1971. Do you have a preference as to which race you'd like to be?'
Given we can all agree no race is superior to another....why is it that most people would choose to be white?

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


(1)
Message 251 of 276 (779204)
03-01-2016 7:03 PM
Reply to: Message 250 by Jon
03-01-2016 6:41 PM


Re: the history and mathematics of prejudice
This is what I was replying to when I asked you to point out where I declared European- and African-American cultures as homogenous.
I know, that's what I was referring to when I said
quote:
I was being economic with words, but you were referring to 'English culture' that everyone that speaks English having access too. There being different English Languages and different English Culture is kind of the important point.
Email? I don't get notifications, I replied to your post; you updated it while I was typing. Shit happens. You can get over it now.
Get over it? Get over yourself.
I apologize for thinking the charitable explanation was that you were working of a copy that was emailed to you. The truth is that you clicked 'reply' within a minute or two of me posting and then took 3 hours to write less than 30 words. You can hardly blame me for {not} concluding as most probable the hypothesis that involves you being very quick to click but very slow to type.
In any event, I'm surprised it didn't occur to you.
Being Indian also maximizes one's chances of not speaking AAVE.
Take it over to the Indian Privilege thread.
And at this point you're not even talking about a 'privilege', but rather a 'disadvantage',
Two sides of the same coin.
No; just that's it's not at all indicative of a 'privilege', and certainly not one tied to race.
Except being born white gives you the privilege of being much more unlikely to have AAVE as your primary language, given the hypothesis that AAVE disadvantages test takers.
That's the argued privilege you have just because you are white.
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 250 by Jon, posted 03-01-2016 6:41 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 252 by Jon, posted 03-01-2016 9:45 PM Modulous has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024