@Black Humor: yeah, it's about as big a strawman as you conflating our argument of "shit isn't that simple" with "institutional racism doesn't exist".
edited 24th Jan '12 5:31:15 PM by drunkscriblerian
If I were to write some of the strange things that come under my eyes they would not be believed. ~Cora M. Strayer~@Black Humor: Lots of stuff, ranging from the mild to the severe. On the mild end of the scale, I did get routinely eyed suspiciously if I went shopping at the local store growing up, and one of the clerks did openly comment on my race (he wanted to know why a white person would shop there, only in more vulgar terms). On the more severe end of the scale, physical violence. At the worst, I received a fractured skull and resultant brain damage because someone believed that blondes were easy, and when I refused to sleep with him, he called me a "stuck up white bitch" and knocked me out.
Or is that not considered racial discrimination?
Actually, I'm going to take a break from this thread. I dislike how it's going, and I really don't think I can keep it cool in here.
edited 24th Jan '12 5:33:52 PM by DrunkGirlfriend
"I don't know how I do it. I'm like the Mr. Bean of sex." -DrunkscriblerianThis, essentially. I'm not very good at being succinct.
What I'm about to say is similar to what a few people have said already, but I want to add my voice to it: I reject the idea that "white" people are obligated to feel guilty about, for example, slavery. I reject the idea that guilt can be inherited. You are guilty of your own wrong actions, no one else's.
It's important to add, however, that this does nothing to absolve us (and by "us", I mean everyone) of the responsibility of fixing the problem of widespread injustice in our society based upon race. We've all had a giant mess dumped in our collective lap. It hurts some of us much more than others, but we are all obligated to fix it. I went into this in more detail in a previous post, so I won't take up any more screen space here.
On a different sub-topic, I maintain that these "we have it bad, too", "we have it way worse" discussions amount to a pissing contest that has no real value. "White people get discriminated against, too, so quit complaining." Somehow this is supposed to make it better? No, Hypothetical Complaining Person still has a valid complaint. The fact that someone else might also does nothing to diminish this fact. And this is a two-way street. If someone gets discriminated against for being "white," the correct response is not "black people have it way worse, so quit bitching," it's "that's fucked up, I'm sorry that happened."
To put this another way: "Black people get discriminated against, but white people do, too." "White people get discriminated against, but black people have it way worse."
The problem with these sentences is that they're both using the wrong conjunction. The proper way of linking the two clauses is not "but", it is "and". Because they are both instances of injustice, and they both have the same root cause: racism.
And I would argue, as I've stated and explained before, that the real root cause of both of them is race itself, and that the more we do to undermine that concept, the better. And thus it is in all our interests to realize and act on the fact that race is an unreasonable and bad way of viewing people. Though clearly not everyone here agrees with me on this last part.
Now, it is another thing to say that prejudice against "black" people (for example) is a more severe and wide-ranging problem with worse consequences than prejudice against "white" people, and thus we ought to devote more of our resources to eliminating it (and I would agree with that statement). Personally, I think the best use of our resources (or at least one of the best) is in education geared toward discrediting the concept of race altogether. This strategy would (eventually) kill X birds with one stone, where X is the total number of discrimination-facing racial groups in the world. But if one simply must discount the idea of ever being post-racial (and I don't, but if one must), then it only makes sense to devote more resources to fixing the more severe problem (that of "anti-black discrimination" as opposed to "anti-white discrimination"). But that's a much more respectful response than "black people have it way worse, so quit complaining".
And preemptively, no one has said "black people have it way worse, so quit complaining", or "white people get discriminated against too, so quit complaining" in this thread. I'm speaking about exchanges I've witnessed elsewhere and that seem distressingly common.
See you all tomorrow, probably.
"If there is such a phenomenon as absolute evil, it consists in treating another human being as a thing." -John BrunnerSince we bring up are the concept of 'overrepresentation. I should point out that despite making up less then 3% of the American population, white jewish people made up 10 of the 100 U.S. Senators are Jewish (a five times over-representation) and there are 27 Jews in the House of Representatives
. Constituting 6.5% of the membership. Also %33 of the US Supreme Court members are also jewish
.
When compare to the rest of the US demographic, where are all the catholic and muslim justices?
edited 24th Jan '12 8:10:43 PM by joeyjojo
hashtagsarestupid@joey: ...because Jews are, at least in modern-day America, white people? If your religion is made up entirely of people who get overrepresented, you are also going to be overrepresented without any bias towards your religion directly.
EDIT:
I don't think I ever did that? If you can show me where I did that I will apologize.
edited 24th Jan '12 8:13:24 PM by BlackHumor
If we define white privilege as overrepresentation in positions of power and authority in government and business, then it stand to reason that jewish people are to white people what white people are to non white races.
edited 24th Jan '12 8:21:47 PM by joeyjojo
hashtagsarestupidIt's not quite analogous, since white gentiles have been really good at fucking Jews over throughout the ages.
You are a blowfish.I don't know what the fuck happened while I stepped away, but....I hope we're all somewhat chilled out.
Hsere: I couldn't've said it better myself. And I don't disagree with you that humanity would be better off if we did away with this bullshit construct of race.
However, I fear that the language of your suggestion, means we also do away with the basic fact that race IS a problem. I agree with you that we should remove the cancerous tumor, but I still feel that we must treat the damage and trauma, while it "sounds" like you want to say the newly cured cancer patient, "Well, you're all done now."
Black Humor: Like I said, I think DG and DS simply wanted you to acknowledge that they've had it rough as white people. That's all.
edited 24th Jan '12 8:38:22 PM by TheStarshipMaxima
It was an honorOK, I want to discuss what I'm going to call inherited structural bias (isb). It is a form of white privilege that I'm not sure what we can do about.
Let's say that on the whole, white people have some neutral trait, that, on the whole, black people do not. It isn't a good trait, it isn't a bad trait, it's just a trait. It also isn't genetic; it's cultural. More white people have this trait because they grew up in communities where it was the norm. I'm going to pick a trait and assign it to a side at random.
OK, in my hypothetical, white people are 20% louder than black people. Now, black people in this hypo culturally grow up in a community where they speak in softer tones - not inaudible by any means, just not as loud as white people.
Now, in businesses, the hierarchies are filled mostly with white males because of previous generations' legal racism. White people tend to be richer because of it, so they more easily find themselves in management positions. Because of this, they have an isb toward being louder. The softer-spoken blacks will find themselves at a disadvantage for a neutral trait.
The problem is, we will not recognize this as racism. First of all, right now, you might have a white person looking to fill positions, and as far as he's concerned, loud means better attitude. He won't think of himself as being racist, he'll just see something regarding cultural familiarity. Soft spoken people put him on edge, and put the people around him on edge. Therefore, when he interviews a black person for a management job, the isb makes it less likely that the black person will get it.
Secondly, it's a cultural difference. People will point to black people who grew up in more affluent communities and say, "Well they're loud - and they get jobs much easier. Just be louder, it has nothing to do with race." And, to a point, it's true. The louder blacks in this situation will have some of the same advantages that whites do.
Third, the cultural difference won't be seen as, "White people are loud, white people dominate the business power structure; therefore, the more soft-spoken blacks are at a disadvantage." Rather, it will be seen as, "The business culture is loud." Because in this scenario, it is and has been for generations.
Does anybody else see the problem the same way I do? Anybody see any solutions other than, "Adapt to another culture's norms until your culture has enough of a shoe-in to affect the business culture's norms?"
Much to my BFF's wife's chagrin, No Pants 2013 became No Pants 2010's at his house.@Gwirion: Nearly all American Jews are white. If white people are overrepresented at about a 3:1 ratio at certain things, Jews also will be.
Not to the extent that Joey claims; there are enough Jews in America to account for about 6% of Congress. And they actually are about 8% of Congress
, which is not a terribly big deviation.
edited 25th Jan '12 8:41:51 AM by BlackHumor
@Iaculus: I'm not saying this is the only reason for the disparity, merely another form of white privilege.
@Clicketykeys: You are correct. In fact I said right beforehand that I would be selecting a trait then assigning it at random to one side or the other. I did not want to pick an actual trait then have the conversation devolve into whether or not it was a legitimate stereotype or whether I was prejudiced or whatever.
edited 25th Jan '12 11:00:33 AM by Vericrat
Much to my BFF's wife's chagrin, No Pants 2013 became No Pants 2010's at his house.Then let me be very clear that this is not what I am suggesting. Indeed, doing so would be counteproductive toward achieving a post-racial society (which is my ultimate goal in this regard). Problems, by and large, don't go away when you ignore them. Acknowledging that the concept of race is a widespread, deeply-entrenched, thoroughly mistaken, and counterproductive idea would not necessitate forgetting about it, any more than our society has forgotten about eugenics. We've simply decided that it's a bad idea.
In other words, I don't want us (as a society) to pretend that we don't view each other through the filter of race, I just want us to acknowledge that we shouldn't. And I submit that right now, we don't acknowledge that, on the whole.
Now, acting on the conviction that we ought not view each other through racial filters, while simultaneously taking steps to combat the fact that this widely happens and leads to discrimination, certainly presents some very tricky problems. For example, if we take steps to further racially integrate our schools and workplaces (for example), one could argue that we are then buying into the idea that race is real and matters. I would respond that we aren't, rather, we're acknowledging that we all hold the idea, at least at a subconscious level, that it does. And the point of (for example) the integration is to erode that false and destructive idea by presenting evidence to the "hindbrain", if you like, of its falsity.
Admittedly, taking steps to combat the problem of race while still acknowledging the idea of race as a falsehood takes some serious mental effort. But no one ever said ending racism was going to be easy.
Oh, and for the record, Black Humor, I agree with pretty much everything said in that last video.
"If there is such a phenomenon as absolute evil, it consists in treating another human being as a thing." -John Brunner@Hsere: That reminds me:
I know so far in this thread I may have come off as somewhat... abrasive?, because I've only been attacking things other people say.
So I want to say now that just because I don't post my agreement, that shouldn't be taken to mean I don't agree with anyone else in the thread. This goes especially for Hsere; I realize that I have basically only attacked your posts, but that doesn't mean I don't agree with the vast majority of things you've said.
I wouldn't describe it as "abrasive." I certainly was under the impression that you disagreed with me more than you apparently actually do. Thank you for clearing that up. I particularly appreciated how the speaker couched the issue in terms of basic respect for other people.
"If there is such a phenomenon as absolute evil, it consists in treating another human being as a thing." -John BrunnerThe list doesn't seem to realize it's saying "some anecdotes/data are more equal than others, because some people were born wrong" the whole way through. Shit, is there anything I can say that won't "other" someone possessed of the All-Effacing Brownness? I can't attempt to sympathize, or ask for more details, or give a pep talk, or say anything about my personal experience (because, you see, I'm white), or say anything about science (because, you see, most scientists are also white). Hell, even if I have my own cockamamie theories about invisible, oppressive societal constructs everyone is complicit in, I'm not allowed to share. The only thing left to do is say "yes, I agree unquestioningly" and then find a polite way to leave before I step on a land mine.
Truly, this is the way to promote harmony for humankind.
Also I'm a supercilious, manipulative liar who just really wants an excuse to bust out the n-word. Because I'm privileged, don't you know.
Hail Martin Septim!

@DG: That is such a clear strawman I'm not even going to bother to respond to it.
EDIT: Oh, but, if we're going to talk about it, it might be helpful to say how you've been discriminated against.
edited 24th Jan '12 5:25:43 PM by BlackHumor