Law School Discussion

Specific Groups => Minority and Non-Traditional Law Students => Topic started by: Ghost on April 03, 2008, 11:14:17 AM

Title: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Ghost on April 03, 2008, 11:14:17 AM
Do you really think you were going to get into that school anyway? Or is it some pseudo-noble, grand ideal of a meritocracy that you're falsely hiding behind?

Please, indulge us. Why the concern for "equality" now, in this very specific context?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: jack24 on April 03, 2008, 11:18:04 AM
Do you really think you were going to get into that school anyway? Or is it some pseudo-noble, grand ideal of a meritocracy that you're falsely hiding behind?

Please, indulge us. Why the concern for "equality" now, in this very specific context?

This is a hard question to answer. First of all, if AA didn't exist I still wouldn't have been able to get into my number 1 choice because I wasn't really "on the bubble" anyway.
I'm sure there were a few people on the bubble though and they can cry themselves to sleep.

I'm just bugged because now I have to pay out-of-state tuition at my #3 option, but if I were a black female I would have been accepted to my number 1.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: upgrade on April 03, 2008, 11:24:13 AM
Please, indulge us. Why the concern for "equality" now, in this very specific context?

I don't get bent out of shape over AA, but what do you mean "why the concern for equality now in this very specific context?"  Do you think that the majority of people who are opposed to affirmative action only care about equality when they are negatively affected by policies that promote evaluating candidates based on characteristics like skin color?  I think most people want others to be treated equally regardless of factors like this.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Ghost on April 03, 2008, 11:27:24 AM
Please, indulge us. Why the concern for "equality" now, in this very specific context?

I don't get bent out of shape over AA, but what do you mean "why the concern for equality now in this very specific context?"  Do you think that the majority of people who are opposed to affirmative action only care about equality when they are negatively affected by policies that promote evaluating candidates based on characteristics like skin color?  I think most people want others to be treated equally regardless of factors like this.

I would disagree.

I think most are self-interested twerps who are largely concerned with other people having "advantages" they do not have, while completely ignoring the advantages they themselves have had in life.

At any rate, I'd just like to hear their rationale, whether they fit my perceptions or not. 
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Ghost on April 03, 2008, 11:27:43 AM
Do you really think you were going to get into that school anyway? Or is it some pseudo-noble, grand ideal of a meritocracy that you're falsely hiding behind?

Please, indulge us. Why the concern for "equality" now, in this very specific context?

This is a hard question to answer. First of all, if AA didn't exist I still wouldn't have been able to get into my number 1 choice because I wasn't really "on the bubble" anyway.
I'm sure there were a few people on the bubble though and they can cry themselves to sleep.

I'm just bugged because now I have to pay out-of-state tuition at my #3 option, but if I were a black female I would have been accepted to my number 1.


Thank you for your honesty.  :)
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Bulldog86 on April 03, 2008, 12:13:16 PM
I think most are self-interested twerps who are largely concerned with other people having "advantages" they do not have, while completely ignoring the advantages they themselves have had in life.

I'll bite, and hopefully won't regret it... I don't want to get into a big thing about this, but I would like to see if I can at least clarify for you why people think the way they do. (FWIW, I got in everywhere I applied, so AA didn't hurt me personally. Just so you know where I'm coming from.)

OK, so I think you acknowledge part of the problem people have, which is that a factor that one cannot control playing a big role in admissions. Reasonably smart people can work hard and get a good GPA and a good LSAT score... maybe not what they want, exactly, but at least in theory those are based on how YOU personally perform. Ditto for LORs, extracurriculars, work experience, etc. URM status is the one thing that the applicant has zero control over, yet it often has a huge impact.

But, as you say, lots of people have advantages they can't control: Wealthier people, for example, don't have to work in school, can hire LSAT tutors, grow up with the expectation of getting a good education, etc. So AA just compensates for that, right?

Not really. It's not like all white people are rich and all minorities are poor. Do you really think a black kid whose dad was a dentist should get advantages over a white kid who grew up in a singlewide? I don't. I would be more likely to support some sort of socio-economic AA than a race-based AA. I think it would give more real diversity than current programs as well as be more fair. If people actually have overcome a lot to get where they are, they deserve a boost.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Total Idiot Tagger on April 03, 2008, 12:26:14 PM
Do you really think you were going to get into that school anyway? Or is it some pseudo-noble, grand ideal of a meritocracy that you're falsely hiding behind?

Please, indulge us. Why the concern for "equality" now, in this very specific context?

You're it.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Ghost on April 03, 2008, 12:29:44 PM
Do you really think you were going to get into that school anyway? Or is it some pseudo-noble, grand ideal of a meritocracy that you're falsely hiding behind?

Please, indulge us. Why the concern for "equality" now, in this very specific context?

You're it.

Can't tag me, I'm not real.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Ghost on April 03, 2008, 12:31:31 PM
I think most are self-interested twerps who are largely concerned with other people having "advantages" they do not have, while completely ignoring the advantages they themselves have had in life.

I'll bite, and hopefully won't regret it... I don't want to get into a big thing about this, but I would like to see if I can at least clarify for you why people think the way they do. (FWIW, I got in everywhere I applied, so AA didn't hurt me personally. Just so you know where I'm coming from.)

OK, so I think you acknowledge part of the problem people have, which is that a factor that one cannot control playing a big role in admissions. Reasonably smart people can work hard and get a good GPA and a good LSAT score... maybe not what they want, exactly, but at least in theory those are based on how YOU personally perform. Ditto for LORs, extracurriculars, work experience, etc. URM status is the one thing that the applicant has zero control over, yet it often has a huge impact.

But, as you say, lots of people have advantages they can't control: Wealthier people, for example, don't have to work in school, can hire LSAT tutors, grow up with the expectation of getting a good education, etc. So AA just compensates for that, right?

Not really. It's not like all white people are rich and all minorities are poor. Do you really think a black kid whose dad was a dentist should get advantages over a white kid who grew up in a singlewide? I don't. I would be more likely to support some sort of socio-economic AA than a race-based AA. I think it would give more real diversity than current programs as well as be more fair. If people actually have overcome a lot to get where they are, they deserve a boost.

What do you believe the reasons (or goals) for affirmative action are?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: NYU2011 on April 03, 2008, 12:40:59 PM
Please, indulge us. Why the concern for "equality" now, in this very specific context?

I don't get bent out of shape over AA, but what do you mean "why the concern for equality now in this very specific context?"  Do you think that the majority of people who are opposed to affirmative action only care about equality when they are negatively affected by policies that promote evaluating candidates based on characteristics like skin color?  I think most people want others to be treated equally regardless of factors like this.

I would disagree.

I think most are self-interested twerps who are largely concerned with other people having "advantages" they do not have, while completely ignoring the advantages they themselves have had in life.

At any rate, I'd just like to hear their rationale, whether they fit my perceptions or not. 



or are you the self-interested twerp that just wants an advantage?  Or maybe your just racist and think that black people aren't as smart or as strong of candidates regardless of other factors in their life?  Or maybe you are racist and just don't like white people?  Personally I don't think a person should receive advantages or disadvantages because of their skin color.  Furthermore, I think most people who disagree with AA wouldn't have as much of a problem with if it were based on factors such as socioeconomic status.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: pulvillus on April 03, 2008, 12:41:11 PM
I think most are self-interested twerps who are largely concerned with other people having "advantages" they do not have, while completely ignoring the advantages they themselves have had in life.

I'll bite, and hopefully won't regret it... I don't want to get into a big thing about this, but I would like to see if I can at least clarify for you why people think the way they do. (FWIW, I got in everywhere I applied, so AA didn't hurt me personally. Just so you know where I'm coming from.)

OK, so I think you acknowledge part of the problem people have, which is that a factor that one cannot control playing a big role in admissions. Reasonably smart people can work hard and get a good GPA and a good LSAT score... maybe not what they want, exactly, but at least in theory those are based on how YOU personally perform. Ditto for LORs, extracurriculars, work experience, etc. URM status is the one thing that the applicant has zero control over, yet it often has a huge impact.

But, as you say, lots of people have advantages they can't control: Wealthier people, for example, don't have to work in school, can hire LSAT tutors, grow up with the expectation of getting a good education, etc. So AA just compensates for that, right?

Not really. It's not like all white people are rich and all minorities are poor. Do you really think a black kid whose dad was a dentist should get advantages over a white kid who grew up in a singlewide? I don't. I would be more likely to support some sort of socio-economic AA than a race-based AA. I think it would give more real diversity than current programs as well as be more fair. If people actually have overcome a lot to get where they are, they deserve a boost.

I agree completely with the suggestion of changing a race-based AA system into a socio-economic one, in which race might still play a role. The current system, though it might be successful in part, seems to be geared moreso towards satisfying PC statistics than creating equality. As far as intellectual diversity is concerned, I think attracting foreign scholars should play a bigger role. Afterall, regardless of race, most URMs likely are Americans, who grew up in the US and therefore embrace the main culture. People from other parts of the world would be more likely to bring in a different perspective.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: NYU2011 on April 03, 2008, 12:42:42 PM
I think most are self-interested twerps who are largely concerned with other people having "advantages" they do not have, while completely ignoring the advantages they themselves have had in life.

I'll bite, and hopefully won't regret it... I don't want to get into a big thing about this, but I would like to see if I can at least clarify for you why people think the way they do. (FWIW, I got in everywhere I applied, so AA didn't hurt me personally. Just so you know where I'm coming from.)

OK, so I think you acknowledge part of the problem people have, which is that a factor that one cannot control playing a big role in admissions. Reasonably smart people can work hard and get a good GPA and a good LSAT score... maybe not what they want, exactly, but at least in theory those are based on how YOU personally perform. Ditto for LORs, extracurriculars, work experience, etc. URM status is the one thing that the applicant has zero control over, yet it often has a huge impact.

But, as you say, lots of people have advantages they can't control: Wealthier people, for example, don't have to work in school, can hire LSAT tutors, grow up with the expectation of getting a good education, etc. So AA just compensates for that, right?

Not really. It's not like all white people are rich and all minorities are poor. Do you really think a black kid whose dad was a dentist should get advantages over a white kid who grew up in a singlewide? I don't. I would be more likely to support some sort of socio-economic AA than a race-based AA. I think it would give more real diversity than current programs as well as be more fair. If people actually have overcome a lot to get where they are, they deserve a boost.

What do you believe the reasons (or goals) for affirmative action are?


If the goals are to help those that are socioeconomically disadvantaged then why not help those with socioeconomic disadvantages regardless of race?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: SteelersandGators on April 03, 2008, 12:45:26 PM
If the goals are to help those that are socioeconomically disadvantaged then why not help those with socioeconomic disadvantages regardless of race?

the goals are not to help those that are socioeconomically disadvantaged.  i can't imagine why anyone would think that this was the goal of aa.

I'll bite.

What is the goal of AA?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: NYU2011 on April 03, 2008, 12:45:58 PM
TM, that seems to be what Ghost insinuated.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: SteelersandGators on April 03, 2008, 12:54:05 PM
If the goals are to help those that are socioeconomically disadvantaged then why not help those with socioeconomic disadvantages regardless of race?

the goals are not to help those that are socioeconomically disadvantaged.  i can't imagine why anyone would think that this was the goal of aa.

I'll bite.

What is the goal of AA?

"i'll bite" implies that there was bait.

TM, that seems to be what Ghost insinuated.

oh.  well ghost is wrong.

I'll rephrase my post:

What is the goal of AA?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Ghost on April 03, 2008, 01:10:37 PM
I think most are self-interested twerps who are largely concerned with other people having "advantages" they do not have, while completely ignoring the advantages they themselves have had in life.

I'll bite, and hopefully won't regret it... I don't want to get into a big thing about this, but I would like to see if I can at least clarify for you why people think the way they do. (FWIW, I got in everywhere I applied, so AA didn't hurt me personally. Just so you know where I'm coming from.)

OK, so I think you acknowledge part of the problem people have, which is that a factor that one cannot control playing a big role in admissions. Reasonably smart people can work hard and get a good GPA and a good LSAT score... maybe not what they want, exactly, but at least in theory those are based on how YOU personally perform. Ditto for LORs, extracurriculars, work experience, etc. URM status is the one thing that the applicant has zero control over, yet it often has a huge impact.

But, as you say, lots of people have advantages they can't control: Wealthier people, for example, don't have to work in school, can hire LSAT tutors, grow up with the expectation of getting a good education, etc. So AA just compensates for that, right?

Not really. It's not like all white people are rich and all minorities are poor. Do you really think a black kid whose dad was a dentist should get advantages over a white kid who grew up in a singlewide? I don't. I would be more likely to support some sort of socio-economic AA than a race-based AA. I think it would give more real diversity than current programs as well as be more fair. If people actually have overcome a lot to get where they are, they deserve a boost.

What do you believe the reasons (or goals) for affirmative action are?

Why is this still unanswered?

I get it. The other side doesn't know, but rather they have their own inventions of what the goals are. And when pressed they simply parrot the question back.

::yawns::
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Ghost on April 03, 2008, 01:13:06 PM
Please, indulge us. Why the concern for "equality" now, in this very specific context?

I don't get bent out of shape over AA, but what do you mean "why the concern for equality now in this very specific context?"  Do you think that the majority of people who are opposed to affirmative action only care about equality when they are negatively affected by policies that promote evaluating candidates based on characteristics like skin color?  I think most people want others to be treated equally regardless of factors like this.

I would disagree.

I think most are self-interested twerps who are largely concerned with other people having "advantages" they do not have, while completely ignoring the advantages they themselves have had in life.

At any rate, I'd just like to hear their rationale, whether they fit my perceptions or not. 



or are you the self-interested twerp that just wants an advantage?  Or maybe your just racist and think that black people aren't as smart or as strong of candidates regardless of other factors in their life?  Or maybe you are racist and just don't like white people?  Personally I don't think a person should receive advantages or disadvantages because of their skin color.  Furthermore, I think most people who disagree with AA wouldn't have as much of a problem with if it were based on factors such as socioeconomic status.

What about the advantages you received because of your white skin?

Oh wait, you don't perceive such advantages, therefore they do not exist. I get it. You pulled yourself up with your bootstraps from the same deplorable conditions as the most destitute minorities, yet through your own faculties and merits you've succeeded, and furthermore you expect no assistance from anyone, nor do you feel it "fair" that anyone else receive assistance.

::yawns again::
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Ghost on April 03, 2008, 01:14:15 PM
Why is this still unanswered?

because the manner in which you posed the question was FLAWED.

Unflaw it for me.

Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Ghost on April 03, 2008, 01:14:43 PM
TM, that seems to be what Ghost insinuated.

How so?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Ghost on April 03, 2008, 01:15:32 PM
Lulz @ Matthies.

Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dekocards on April 03, 2008, 01:16:52 PM
I wish I were a WASP or a URM...
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Ghost on April 03, 2008, 01:17:40 PM
Unflaw it for me.

i'm not going to clean up your mess for you.  stop being lazy.

Shh, I'm trolling.

I'm happy with how my question was asked. I'll ask it again:

"What do you believe the reasons (or goals) for affirmative action are?"

Note the emphasis. This is what I'm interested in, for the sake of this thread.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: rebelfan286 on April 03, 2008, 01:20:27 PM
I'm a WASP, and I have absolutely no problem with AA.  Just get over it, and use your whiteness to help you succeed.  We are in a club, a special, special club.  Enjoy it!
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: NYU2011 on April 03, 2008, 01:21:15 PM
Please, indulge us. Why the concern for "equality" now, in this very specific context?

I don't get bent out of shape over AA, but what do you mean "why the concern for equality now in this very specific context?"  Do you think that the majority of people who are opposed to affirmative action only care about equality when they are negatively affected by policies that promote evaluating candidates based on characteristics like skin color?  I think most people want others to be treated equally regardless of factors like this.

I would disagree.

I think most are self-interested twerps who are largely concerned with other people having "advantages" they do not have, while completely ignoring the advantages they themselves have had in life.

At any rate, I'd just like to hear their rationale, whether they fit my perceptions or not. 



or are you the self-interested twerp that just wants an advantage?  Or maybe your just racist and think that black people aren't as smart or as strong of candidates regardless of other factors in their life?  Or maybe you are racist and just don't like white people?  Personally I don't think a person should receive advantages or disadvantages because of their skin color.  Furthermore, I think most people who disagree with AA wouldn't have as much of a problem with if it were based on factors such as socioeconomic status.

What about the advantages you received because of your white skin?

Oh wait, you don't perceive such advantages, therefore they do not exist. I get it. You pulled yourself up with your bootstraps from the same deplorable conditions as the most destitute minorities, yet through your own faculties and merits you've succeeded, and furthermore you expect no assistance from anyone, nor do you feel it "fair" that anyone else receive assistance.

::yawns again::


Ghost what advantage have I ever received because I am White?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dekocards on April 03, 2008, 01:22:00 PM
I wish I were a WASP or a URM...

You could allways go gay, you don't have to be born into that minority.

I think most Gays would disagree...  Well I'm up for a challange, who wants to take it up the poopshute?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: goaliechica on April 03, 2008, 01:23:53 PM
I'm a WASP, and I have absolutely no problem with AA.  Just get over it, and use your whiteness to help you succeed.  We are in a club, a special, special club.  Enjoy it!

 :D :D :D
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: NYU2011 on April 03, 2008, 01:25:45 PM
For the wealthy white person AA is about making it seem like they are helping the "little disadvantaged guy" (which they are not)and for minorities supporting AA is about being given an advantage, whether or not they deserve it.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Ghost on April 03, 2008, 01:27:43 PM

Ghost what advantage have I ever received because I am White?

Lulz.  :D

Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: NYU2011 on April 03, 2008, 01:30:47 PM
I do not believe a minority is = a disadvantaged person.  There are plenty of minorities who would fall into the "advantaged" category and many White's (or Asians in the case of law school) who fall into the "disadvantaged" category.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 03, 2008, 01:31:37 PM
I wish I were a WASP or a URM...
This false binary is the best roflcoprer of this whole debate.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: PSUDSL08 on April 03, 2008, 01:43:58 PM
I haven't read a lot of the posts here, so if my responses are redundant in any way, I apologize in advance. Furthermore, it was my own laziness in college and standardized testing ineptitude that led to me going to a T4 prior to transferring.

Don't you see the inherent hypocrisy in AA? It's like saying "We want to be treated equally, except when it benefits us." I think there is a need to promote diversity in the field of law and I think AA is the government's patchwork attempt at the process. Personally, I think a more economic-based system woudl be appropriate, but I'm not even going to begin to suggest how to implement such a system.

My original T4 school has had a problem with maintaining minority enrollment to the point where they considered imposing a different curve for minority students. In my section of 90 students, there were 9 minority students. 5 dropped out after the first semester, and 2 more followed in the Spring. I've heard these seven individuals participate in class and couldn't comprehend basic legal concepts, or answer questions in class. The school, knowing that the minority dropout rate is staggering, continues to profit from kids who should not be going to law school to begin with. Now, these students are stuck paying back an additional $30K and are in a worse position than when they entered.

My dad is a prosecutor and his boss is an African-American woman who attended Rutgers-Newark. On her application, she declined to indicate her race because she was insulted by the idea that her skin color alone should give her a boost in the applications process. She was ultimately accepted to Rutgers, but once the admissions dept found out that she was black, they threatened to withdraw the acceptance unless she checked off the "African-American" box on her application. She reluctantly did so because Rutgers was far more affordable than her other options. She went from being considered a "catch" to being considered a "quota fulfillment."

I'll ask the OP this. You need life saving surgery, where even the slightest slip-up in the surgical process means the end of your life. You have two potential surgeons, one is white, the other is black. You've met neither, know nothing about their educational or practical backgrounds. With no other information, which one would you choose to perform that surgery?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dekocards on April 03, 2008, 01:50:19 PM
I wish I were a WASP or a URM...
This false binary is the best roflcoprer of this whole debate.

Yup, there's where I was going with it... I am actually a WASP, but don't tell anyone; I like to enjoy my "white-privilege" in peace.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: rebelfan286 on April 03, 2008, 01:56:34 PM
I'll ask the OP this. You need life saving surgery, where even the slightest slip-up in the surgical process means the end of your life. You have two potential surgeons, one is white, the other is black. You've met neither, know nothing about their educational or practical backgrounds. With no other information, which one would you choose to perform that surgery?

I'd find me an Asian one, we know they are better at science stuff like that

QFT
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Ghost on April 03, 2008, 02:05:42 PM
"I know a white girl accepted to Boalt with a 154 LSAT blah blah blah..."

Which is actually true.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 03, 2008, 02:11:24 PM
...

My original T4 school has had a problem with maintaining minority enrollment to the point where they considered imposing a different curve for minority students. In my section of 90 students, there were 9 minority students. 5 dropped out after the first semester, and 2 more followed in the Spring. I've heard these seven individuals participate in class and couldn't comprehend basic legal concepts, or answer questions in class. The school, knowing that the minority dropout rate is staggering, continues to profit from kids who should not be going to law school to begin with. Now, these students are stuck paying back an additional $30K and are in a worse position than when they entered. ou choose to perform that surgery?

Could you elaborate on this, because I just checked the attrition rates of the T6, and only at NYU did more than 2 students per year drop out (NYU saw five one year) and only one in any school was due to academic reasons.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dekocards on April 03, 2008, 02:13:24 PM
"I know a white girl accepted to Boalt with a 154 LSAT blah blah blah..."

Which is actually true.

She probably checked a minority box.  I considered it.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Outlaw22 on April 03, 2008, 02:27:04 PM

Ghost what advantage have I ever received because I am White?

I'm white and well aware of the advantages I have because I'm white. And you are too. I'm also a woman and the daughter of working class parents who didn't go to college and yet I still realize, despite my gender/socioeconomic status, that in our society I was born on third base simply because of the color of my skin (and my parents' and their parents' and their parents'). Whatever your background may be - you were too.  But unlike you, I don't go around pretending that I hit a triple.  
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: PSUDSL08 on April 03, 2008, 02:29:23 PM
...

My original T4 school has had a problem with maintaining minority enrollment to the point where they considered imposing a different curve for minority students. In my section of 90 students, there were 9 minority students. 5 dropped out after the first semester, and 2 more followed in the Spring. I've heard these seven individuals participate in class and couldn't comprehend basic legal concepts, or answer questions in class. The school, knowing that the minority dropout rate is staggering, continues to profit from kids who should not be going to law school to begin with. Now, these students are stuck paying back an additional $30K and are in a worse position than when they entered. ou choose to perform that surgery?

Could you elaborate on this, because I just checked the attrition rates of the T6, and only at NYU did more than 2 students per year drop out (NYU saw five one year) and only one in any school was due to academic reasons.

i think she meant tier 4, not top 4.

Youre correct, except it's "he"
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 03, 2008, 02:56:33 PM
...

My original T4 school has had a problem with maintaining minority enrollment to the point where they considered imposing a different curve for minority students. In my section of 90 students, there were 9 minority students. 5 dropped out after the first semester, and 2 more followed in the Spring. I've heard these seven individuals participate in class and couldn't comprehend basic legal concepts, or answer questions in class. The school, knowing that the minority dropout rate is staggering, continues to profit from kids who should not be going to law school to begin with. Now, these students are stuck paying back an additional $30K and are in a worse position than when they entered. ou choose to perform that surgery?

Could you elaborate on this, because I just checked the attrition rates of the T6, and only at NYU did more than 2 students per year drop out (NYU saw five one year) and only one in any school was due to academic reasons.

i think she meant tier 4, not top 4.

Youre correct, except it's "he"

I had you pegged as a chick too. Oh god my stereotypes are breaking down, how will I ever pick the right doctor to save me?

I figured he was some guy named Zuckerinsky from Penn State.  Women don't pick user names like that.

Oops.  Bad me.  Stereotyping again.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 03, 2008, 03:07:50 PM
...

My original T4 school has had a problem with maintaining minority enrollment to the point where they considered imposing a different curve for minority students. In my section of 90 students, there were 9 minority students. 5 dropped out after the first semester, and 2 more followed in the Spring. I've heard these seven individuals participate in class and couldn't comprehend basic legal concepts, or answer questions in class. The school, knowing that the minority dropout rate is staggering, continues to profit from kids who should not be going to law school to begin with. Now, these students are stuck paying back an additional $30K and are in a worse position than when they entered. ou choose to perform that surgery?

Could you elaborate on this, because I just checked the attrition rates of the T6, and only at NYU did more than 2 students per year drop out (NYU saw five one year) and only one in any school was due to academic reasons.

i think she meant tier 4, not top 4.

Youre correct, except it's "he"

I had you pegged as a chick too. Oh god my stereotypes are breaking down, how will I ever pick the right doctor to save me?

I figured he was some guy named Zuckerinsky from Penn State.  Women don't pick user names like that.

Oops.  Bad me.  Stereotyping again.

Don't stereotype honey!

::pats MBW on the behind and winks::

Careful...there might just be a reason people call me Mrs. Robinson.

Okay...One person called me that...Or maybe I just hallucinated it.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 03, 2008, 03:08:57 PM

Ghost what advantage have I ever received because I am White?

I'm white and well aware of the advantages I have because I'm white. And you are too. I'm also a woman and the daughter of working class parents who didn't go to college and yet I still realize, despite my gender/socioeconomic status, that in our society I was born on third base simply because of the color of my skin (and my parents' and their parents' and their parents'). Whatever your background may be - you were too.  But unlike you, I don't go around pretending that I hit a triple. 
I am actually all for AA, but I find the above highly offensive.

I moved to this country when I was 6, grew up in the ghetto, lived on welfare, dropped out of high school, worked full time while paying for a public TTT education, and am only barely being able to start entering the middle class. The only thing my white skin has done for me is help me get my ass kicked in junior high school for being "wonderbread".

Sure, African Americans as a wholesale demographic group are disadvantaged - but there are plenty of individual minorities who have lived much more comfortable lives than me, and I'm far from being the only one.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Ghost on April 03, 2008, 03:21:30 PM

Ghost what advantage have I ever received because I am White?

I'm white and well aware of the advantages I have because I'm white. And you are too. I'm also a woman and the daughter of working class parents who didn't go to college and yet I still realize, despite my gender/socioeconomic status, that in our society I was born on third base simply because of the color of my skin (and my parents' and their parents' and their parents'). Whatever your background may be - you were too.  But unlike you, I don't go around pretending that I hit a triple. 
I am actually all for AA, but I find the above highly offensive.

I moved to this country when I was 6, grew up in the ghetto, lived on welfare, dropped out of high school, worked full time while paying for a public TTT education, and am only barely being able to start entering the middle class. The only thing my white skin has done for me is help me get my ass kicked in junior high school for being "wonderbread".

Sure, African Americans as a wholesale demographic group are disadvantaged - but there are plenty of individual minorities who have lived much more comfortable lives than me, and I'm far from being the only one.

Another hard-lifer!

But anyway, no one is arguing anything close to contrary to what you're saying. We are [implying] that there are policy decisions in place - for a variety of reasons - that tends to consider things in broader terms.

Sorry if you fall through the cracks - you seem as if you'll end up just fine ;)

But we might have to reconsider, with this vast amount of poor white kids that have had to overcome a whole world of problems! Maybe our socioeconomic and demographic calculations are all wrong! Perhaps there really are more than a sliver of minorities in leadership, ownership, and other high level professional positions (we just can't see them because we are so enlightened as to not see a person's skin color)!

Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 03, 2008, 03:27:08 PM

Ghost what advantage have I ever received because I am White?

I'm white and well aware of the advantages I have because I'm white. And you are too. I'm also a woman and the daughter of working class parents who didn't go to college and yet I still realize, despite my gender/socioeconomic status, that in our society I was born on third base simply because of the color of my skin (and my parents' and their parents' and their parents'). Whatever your background may be - you were too.  But unlike you, I don't go around pretending that I hit a triple. 
I am actually all for AA, but I find the above highly offensive.

I moved to this country when I was 6, grew up in the ghetto, lived on welfare, dropped out of high school, worked full time while paying for a public TTT education, and am only barely being able to start entering the middle class. The only thing my white skin has done for me is help me get my ass kicked in junior high school for being "wonderbread".

Sure, African Americans as a wholesale demographic group are disadvantaged - but there are plenty of individual minorities who have lived much more comfortable lives than me, and I'm far from being the only one.

See, this is the very reason I support the current ABA emphasis of moving away from AA to a "diversity-based" recruiting strategy.  It certainly won't be perfect, but if you look at your applicant pool in toto and develop a class from that pool, keeping diversity as your guiding principle, then your disadvantaged background is on par with other applicants' soft factors.

The AA system, as it's been utilized for perhaps the past couple of decades isn't all ponies and daisies for URMs either - there's a general understanding that some flavors of URM are more desirable than others, and there are associated hard feelings at times.  I certainly think, from a strict AA diversity perspective, that any kid who grows up on the Rez should get a higher bump than I; but then, I should probably get a higher bump than someone with a CIBD card but no cultural affiliation.  That's not how its worked in the past, but it seems to be moving towards that with the current goal of "increasing diversity.

ETA:  I re-read those last few sentences and tried to fix them as my point wasn't exactly clear (probably from lack of sleep due to children gacking in the middle of the night.) 
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 03, 2008, 03:32:58 PM

Ghost what advantage have I ever received because I am White?

I'm white and well aware of the advantages I have because I'm white. And you are too. I'm also a woman and the daughter of working class parents who didn't go to college and yet I still realize, despite my gender/socioeconomic status, that in our society I was born on third base simply because of the color of my skin (and my parents' and their parents' and their parents'). Whatever your background may be - you were too.  But unlike you, I don't go around pretending that I hit a triple. 
I am actually all for AA, but I find the above highly offensive.

I moved to this country when I was 6, grew up in the ghetto, lived on welfare, dropped out of high school, worked full time while paying for a public TTT education, and am only barely being able to start entering the middle class. The only thing my white skin has done for me is help me get my ass kicked in junior high school for being "wonderbread".

Sure, African Americans as a wholesale demographic group are disadvantaged - but there are plenty of individual minorities who have lived much more comfortable lives than me, and I'm far from being the only one.

Another hard-lifer!

But anyway, no one is arguing anything close to contrary to what you're saying. We are [implying] that there are policy decisions in place - for a variety of reasons - that tends to consider things in broader terms.

Sorry if you fall through the cracks - you seem as if you'll end up just fine ;)

But we might have to reconsider, with this vast amount of poor white kids that have had to overcome a whole world of problems! Maybe our socioeconomic and demographic calculations are all wrong! Perhaps there really are more than a sliver of minorities in leadership, ownership, and other high level professional positions (we just can't see them because we are so enlightened as to not see a person's skin color)!


1) My post did not address AA (which I am in support of), but rather the nonsensical proposition that merely by being white, people start off at "third base". There are millions of white people that never even had the chance to go up to bat.

2) The fact that I am doing reasonably well for myself after 25 years of struggle says nothing about some kind of privilege I have recieved for being white. Sorry - there was no privilege. Like any other kid who grew up in the hood, I have Asthma, I have been mugged, I have had run ins with the law, and went through a horrendous education system. White kids growing up in Podunk, Arkansas don't have it any better than black kids growing up in a Brooklyn ghetto.

3)"another hard-lifer" - It's exactly this kind of dismissive bull that I get offended at. "Oh poor white boy had to live on food stamps!" Hell yeah I did - Just like all the other kids growing up in the slum I grew up in. How the hell am I any better off than them? How dare you tell me that I have somehow been given the golden ticket to life. I earned every single advantage I have, the color of my skin had absolutely nothing to do with it.

4) I never said anything about reconsidering demographics. I am in support of AA specifically BECAUSE of the demographic facts. If you read my original post instead of being a complete shill, maybe you would have seen that.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: SteelersandGators on April 03, 2008, 03:53:25 PM

Ghost what advantage have I ever received because I am White?

I'm white and well aware of the advantages I have because I'm white. And you are too. I'm also a woman and the daughter of working class parents who didn't go to college and yet I still realize, despite my gender/socioeconomic status, that in our society I was born on third base simply because of the color of my skin (and my parents' and their parents' and their parents'). Whatever your background may be - you were too.  But unlike you, I don't go around pretending that I hit a triple.  

Wow....I can't believe you typed that and weren't able to realize the HUGE generalization you made.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: lovethelaw2010 on April 03, 2008, 04:00:39 PM

Ghost what advantage have I ever received because I am White?

I'm white and well aware of the advantages I have because I'm white. And you are too. I'm also a woman and the daughter of working class parents who didn't go to college and yet I still realize, despite my gender/socioeconomic status, that in our society I was born on third base simply because of the color of my skin (and my parents' and their parents' and their parents'). Whatever your background may be - you were too.  But unlike you, I don't go around pretending that I hit a triple. 

Wow....I can't believe you typed that and weren't able to realize the HUGE generalization you made.

Wow, that is pretty sad.  I know some pretty poor white kids who would really argue with the fact that they were born on third base.  They grew up abused and with drug addicted parents and definitely didn't have much handed to them.  I also know some pretty wealthy black kids who probably were born on third base and have had an easier life than any white kid I know.  And they will tell you that themselves. 

Unlike you, some people dislike AA because there is a real problem behind it which is socioeconomic status and we don't need to go around making ourselves feel warn and fuzzy addressing a much smaller problem when the real problem is much larger and nobody really seems to want to address it.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: NYU2011 on April 03, 2008, 04:19:01 PM

Ghost what advantage have I ever received because I am White?

I'm white and well aware of the advantages I have because I'm white. And you are too. I'm also a woman and the daughter of working class parents who didn't go to college and yet I still realize, despite my gender/socioeconomic status, that in our society I was born on third base simply because of the color of my skin (and my parents' and their parents' and their parents'). Whatever your background may be - you were too.  But unlike you, I don't go around pretending that I hit a triple. 



What advantages? All you people talk about is "advantages you know you have."  Yet no one can name any. 
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 03, 2008, 04:35:27 PM

Ghost what advantage have I ever received because I am White?

I'm white and well aware of the advantages I have because I'm white. And you are too. I'm also a woman and the daughter of working class parents who didn't go to college and yet I still realize, despite my gender/socioeconomic status, that in our society I was born on third base simply because of the color of my skin (and my parents' and their parents' and their parents'). Whatever your background may be - you were too.  But unlike you, I don't go around pretending that I hit a triple. 



What advantages? All you people talk about is "advantages you know you have."  Yet no one can name any. 

Here's a checklist for you, from sociologist Peggy McIntosh of Wellesley University:

___ 1. I can arrange to be in the company of people of my race most of the time.

___ 2. I can go shopping alone most of the time, pretty well assured that I will not be followed or harassed.

___ 3. I can turn on the television or open to the front page of the paper and see people of my race widely represented.

___ 4. When I am told about our national heritage or about "civilization", I am shown that people of my color made it what it is.

___ 5. I can be sure that my children will be given curricular materials that testify to the existence of their race.

___ 6. I can go into a music shop and count on finding the music of my race represented, into a supermarket and find the food I grew up with, into a hairdresser's shop and find someone who can deal with my hair.

___ 7. Whether I use checks, credit cards, or cash, I can count on my skin color not to work against the appearance of financial responsibility.

___ 8. I am not made acutely aware that my shape, bearing, or body odor will be taken as a reflection on my race.

___ 9. I can worry about racism without being seen as self-interested or self-seeking.

___ 10. I can take a job or enroll in a college with an affirmative action policy without having my co-workers or peers assume I got it because of my race.

___ 11. I can be late to a meeting without having the lateness reflect on my race.

___ 12. I can choose public accommodation with out fearing that people of my race cannot get in or will be mistreated.

___ 13. I am never asked to speak for all of the people of my racial group.

___ 14. I can be pretty sure that if I ask to talk with the"person in charge", I will be facing a person of my race.

___ 15. If a traffic cop pulls me over or if the IRS audits my tax return, I can be sure I haven't been singled out because of my race.

___ 16. I can easily by posters, postcards, picture books, greeting cards, dolls, toys, and children.s magazines featuring people of my race.

___ 17. I can choose blemish cover or bandages in .flesh. color and have them more or less match my skin.

___ 18. I can do well in a challenging situation without being called a credit to my race.

___ 19. I can walk into a classroom and know I will not be the only member of my race.

___ 20. I can enroll in a class at college and be sure that the majority of my professors will be of my race.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Outlaw22 on April 03, 2008, 04:48:31 PM

Ghost what advantage have I ever received because I am White?

I'm white and well aware of the advantages I have because I'm white. And you are too. I'm also a woman and the daughter of working class parents who didn't go to college and yet I still realize, despite my gender/socioeconomic status, that in our society I was born on third base simply because of the color of my skin (and my parents' and their parents' and their parents'). Whatever your background may be - you were too.  But unlike you, I don't go around pretending that I hit a triple. 

Wow....I can't believe you typed that and weren't able to realize the HUGE generalization you made.

Wow, that is pretty sad.  I know some pretty poor white kids who would really argue with the fact that they were born on third base.  They grew up abused and with drug addicted parents and definitely didn't have much handed to them.  I also know some pretty wealthy black kids who probably were born on third base and have had an easier life than any white kid I know.  And they will tell you that themselves. 

Unlike you, some people dislike AA because there is a real problem behind it which is socioeconomic status and we don't need to go around making ourselves feel warn and fuzzy addressing a much smaller problem when the real problem is much larger and nobody really seems to want to address it.

My point is being misinterpreted. You cannot say that you are white and don't think you have any advantages because of your skin color. You may have other factors that negatively impact you - trust me I'm aware of all forms of oppression - I've experienced sexism, classism, and homophobia. But when it comes to race - the poster I was responding to was insinuating he/she is unaware of the advantages he has because he/she is white. That is absurd.  
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 03, 2008, 04:54:32 PM
Oh ok, now it makes sense why Asians, Indians and Persians benefit so much from affirmative action. Oh wait, they get REVERSE AA which makes it harder for them to get into some schools than white people since they are overrepresented.

Why the hell are no steps being taken towards socioeconomic based AA? A poor asian kid from Chinatown and a white kid from a trailer park deserve more preference than Michael Jordan's son.

Now you're mixing apples and oranges.  The poster asked specifically about the advantages of being white, aka white privilege, hence the checklist.

Do Asians benefit from general affirmative action laws?  Certainly, in areas where they are in fact a minority (which is practically everywhere outside of Hawai'i and California) and where there aren't state laws barring AA.  They don't benefit in diversity programs (the current policy of the ABA) because they are not underrepresented in law school, in general - in some geographic areas, Asians are viewed as being less represented than their overall population, and thus might get closer scrutiny.  Same goes for some specific ethnicities, such as Laotian, Khmer, etc.  Once again, the current ABA policy goals are diversity, not affirmative action.  There are no quotas, no "add 10 points to the LSAT" etc.

And you should know, as an AS of Hastings, that there are schools which are aggressively moving towards socio-economic factors trumping all others.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: NYU2011 on April 03, 2008, 04:58:35 PM

Ghost what advantage have I ever received because I am White?

I'm white and well aware of the advantages I have because I'm white. And you are too. I'm also a woman and the daughter of working class parents who didn't go to college and yet I still realize, despite my gender/socioeconomic status, that in our society I was born on third base simply because of the color of my skin (and my parents' and their parents' and their parents'). Whatever your background may be - you were too.  But unlike you, I don't go around pretending that I hit a triple. 



What advantages? All you people talk about is "advantages you know you have."  Yet no one can name any. 

Here's a checklist for you, from sociologist Peggy McIntosh of Wellesley University:

___ 1. I can arrange to be in the company of people of my race most of the time.  There are many communities with more black people than white people, the same goes for other minorities.  Furthermore, why does this matter unless your assuming that a majority of White's are racist toward minorities which I do not believe is the case

___ 2. I can go shopping alone most of the time, pretty well assured that I will not be followed or harassed.  I do not think that a majority of minorities have been harassed and followed while going shopping any more than others.  If you go shopping in a big city there is a distinct possibility that you may be harassed by someone on the street asking for money regardless of what race you are.

___ 3. I can turn on the television or open to the front page of the paper and see people of my race widely represented. [Do you actually watch TV?  Blacks are considered a minority and are on many television shows and in the paper.  Most of the items in the front page of the paper are negative things anyway, would you want to be on the front page?  I also don't know of any WET (white entertainment television) where I can see people of my race almost exclusively.[/b]

___ 4. When I am told about our national heritage or about "civilization", I am shown that people of my color made it what it is. "I also don't remember any "white History month" and I have heard of many blacks who helped shape our country"

___ 5. I can be sure that my children will be given curricular materials that testify to the existence of their race.I dont even know what you are saying by this, I do not believe that many curricular materials say many races are not real.

___ 6. I can go into a music shop and count on finding the music of my race represented, into a supermarket and find the food I grew up with, into a hairdresser's shop and find someone who can deal with my hair.Really now, are you going to tell me that there are no minority music artists?  Supermarkets put up food that they can sell, and there are many supermarkets/restaurants which cater to different preferences

___ 7. Whether I use checks, credit cards, or cash, I can count on my skin color not to work against the appearance of financial responsibility.again your assuming people are racist, I doubt that a majority of minorities are made fun of for using credit cards, checks, or cash.  I have never seen a store that says "Caucasians can use whatever form of currency they would like, Minorities must pay in cash"

___ 8. I am not made acutely aware that my shape, bearing, or body odor will be taken as a reflection on my race.Neither are most minorities.  I will admit that there are some minorities who are generalized to "smell offensive" to other people.  I don't think it should result in said race getting rewarded in any way.

___ 9. I can worry about racism without being seen as self-interested or self-seeking.This works both ways.  I worry about racism (AA) or things like a Black beauty pagent and am told I am a self-interested, self-seeking, racist

___ 10. I can take a job or enroll in a college with an affirmative action policy without having my co-workers or peers assume I got it because of my race.SO TAKE AWAY AA and you will not have this problem...oh wait I doubt you really want to do that

___ 11. I can be late to a meeting without having the lateness reflect on my race.Again I do not believe most in the business world say certain minorities are more tardy than others.

___ 12. I can choose public accommodation with out fearing that people of my race cannot get in or will be mistreated.How many minorities are treated poorly in public accommodation any longer?  And there are some clubs and streets where it is not at all safe to be a white person.

___ 13. I am never asked to speak for all of the people of my racial group.Just was at the beginning of this post (although technically i'm not a WASP, but I am white

___ 14. I can be pretty sure that if I ask to talk with the"person in charge", I will be facing a person of my race.There are plenty of minority managers and leaders.  However, being as they are a minority, there are likely fewer than those of the majority.

___ 15. If a traffic cop pulls me over or if the IRS audits my tax return, I can be sure I haven't been singled out because of my race.so does this mean if a minority cop or woman cop pulls me over I can blame it on being a White male?  I just got a speeding ticket on the way back to campus for going 48 in a 35, with the 45 MPH sign literally 20 feet in front of me.

___ 16. I can easily by posters, postcards, picture books, greeting cards, dolls, toys, and children.s magazines featuring people of my race.again it depends on which minority you are in.  I believe business produce what there is consumer demand for.

___ 17. I can choose blemish cover or bandages in .flesh. color and have them more or less match my skin.are you kidding me!?  So start a business and make bandages that are the color of whatever your skin is if you think it will sell well enough for you to make money

___ 18. I can do well in a challenging situation without being called a credit to my race.I have been told many times that people are surprised what I am doing with my life considering where I came from.  I believe Bearly is probably the same way.

___ 19. I can walk into a classroom and know I will not be the only member of my race.Depends on where you go to school.  There are plenty of schools that are a majority of minority students.

___ 20. I can enroll in a class at college and be sure that the majority of my professors will be of my race.Unless your insinuating that there are many racist teachers I dont understand why this is a problem.  As you are a minority it is probable that most teachers will not be of your race.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 03, 2008, 05:20:05 PM

Do Asians benefit from general affirmative action laws?  Certainly, in areas where they are in fact a minority (which is practically everywhere outside of Hawai'i and California) and where there aren't state laws barring AA. 

I have never heard of an Asian, Indian or Persian getting affirmative action. On the contrary, I have seen white people with much lower SAT and high school GPAs get into better colleges than many of the Asians and Indians I have met. My friend (who is Jewish, not Asian or Indian with an axe to grind) did a research project in college about non-URM minority college admissions, and he found that it is statistically harder for an Asian or Indian person to get into Harvard than a WHITE person with the same scores. He had shocking quotes from an Ivy League admissions officer with things like "we don't like to admit too many Asians because they are socially awkward, isolate themselves from other races and add little to the overall campus environment." Personal experience at one of the more 'Asian' UC schools reflected this in my experience as well. It seemed like the Asians and Indians I talked to always have higher SAT and GPAs than the white kids.

Maybe it's different in law school, but I doubt it. Every school I applied to, whether in CA, midwest, or east coast had more Asians than all the other minorities combined. Furthermore, the premises on which AA are based have been pretty much destroyed by the fact that Persians, Indians and many Asians went from poor to RICH in ONE GENERATION. Help out the poor people, but lazy people of any race don't deserve special treatment. Hard working people of all races deserve it.

You need to re-read my original post.  I said "general affirmative action laws", since affirmative action covers a hell of a lot more than just getting into college.  Asians, where they are a minority, are included in programs which benefit other racial minorities, not just AA, NA/IA and Latino/a peoples, aka URMs.

And you do know that Indians and Persians are in fact Asians? (I'm confused as to why you're naming them as distinct.)  Do you mean East Asians, e.g., Chinese, Japanese, Koreans,along with Indians and Persians?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: naturallybeyoutiful on April 03, 2008, 08:22:14 PM
Here's a checklist for you, from sociologist Peggy McIntosh of Wellesley University:

___ 1. I can arrange to be in the company of people of my race most of the time.  There are many communities with more black people than white people, the same goes for other minorities.  Furthermore, why does this matter unless your assuming that a majority of White's are racist toward minorities which I do not believe is the case

___ 2. I can go shopping alone most of the time, pretty well assured that I will not be followed or harassed.  I do not think that a majority of minorities have been harassed and followed while going shopping any more than others.  If you go shopping in a big city there is a distinct possibility that you may be harassed by someone on the street asking for money regardless of what race you are.

___ 3. I can turn on the television or open to the front page of the paper and see people of my race widely represented. [Do you actually watch TV?  Blacks are considered a minority and are on many television shows and in the paper.  Most of the items in the front page of the paper are negative things anyway, would you want to be on the front page?  I also don't know of any WET (white entertainment television) where I can see people of my race almost exclusively.[/b]

___ 4. When I am told about our national heritage or about "civilization", I am shown that people of my color made it what it is. "I also don't remember any "white History month" and I have heard of many blacks who helped shape our country"

___ 5. I can be sure that my children will be given curricular materials that testify to the existence of their race.I dont even know what you are saying by this, I do not believe that many curricular materials say many races are not real.

___ 6. I can go into a music shop and count on finding the music of my race represented, into a supermarket and find the food I grew up with, into a hairdresser's shop and find someone who can deal with my hair.Really now, are you going to tell me that there are no minority music artists?  Supermarkets put up food that they can sell, and there are many supermarkets/restaurants which cater to different preferences

___ 7. Whether I use checks, credit cards, or cash, I can count on my skin color not to work against the appearance of financial responsibility.again your assuming people are racist, I doubt that a majority of minorities are made fun of for using credit cards, checks, or cash.  I have never seen a store that says "Caucasians can use whatever form of currency they would like, Minorities must pay in cash"

___ 8. I am not made acutely aware that my shape, bearing, or body odor will be taken as a reflection on my race.Neither are most minorities.  I will admit that there are some minorities who are generalized to "smell offensive" to other people.  I don't think it should result in said race getting rewarded in any way.

___ 9. I can worry about racism without being seen as self-interested or self-seeking.This works both ways.  I worry about racism (AA) or things like a Black beauty pagent and am told I am a self-interested, self-seeking, racist

___ 10. I can take a job or enroll in a college with an affirmative action policy without having my co-workers or peers assume I got it because of my race.SO TAKE AWAY AA and you will not have this problem...oh wait I doubt you really want to do that

___ 11. I can be late to a meeting without having the lateness reflect on my race.Again I do not believe most in the business world say certain minorities are more tardy than others.

___ 12. I can choose public accommodation with out fearing that people of my race cannot get in or will be mistreated.How many minorities are treated poorly in public accommodation any longer?  And there are some clubs and streets where it is not at all safe to be a white person.

___ 13. I am never asked to speak for all of the people of my racial group.Just was at the beginning of this post (although technically i'm not a WASP, but I am white

___ 14. I can be pretty sure that if I ask to talk with the"person in charge", I will be facing a person of my race.There are plenty of minority managers and leaders.  However, being as they are a minority, there are likely fewer than those of the majority.

___ 15. If a traffic cop pulls me over or if the IRS audits my tax return, I can be sure I haven't been singled out because of my race.so does this mean if a minority cop or woman cop pulls me over I can blame it on being a White male?  I just got a speeding ticket on the way back to campus for going 48 in a 35, with the 45 MPH sign literally 20 feet in front of me.

___ 16. I can easily by posters, postcards, picture books, greeting cards, dolls, toys, and children.s magazines featuring people of my race.again it depends on which minority you are in.  I believe business produce what there is consumer demand for.

___ 17. I can choose blemish cover or bandages in .flesh. color and have them more or less match my skin.are you kidding me!?  So start a business and make bandages that are the color of whatever your skin is if you think it will sell well enough for you to make money

___ 18. I can do well in a challenging situation without being called a credit to my race.I have been told many times that people are surprised what I am doing with my life considering where I came from.  I believe Bearly is probably the same way.

___ 19. I can walk into a classroom and know I will not be the only member of my race.Depends on where you go to school.  There are plenty of schools that are a majority of minority students.

___ 20. I can enroll in a class at college and be sure that the majority of my professors will be of my race.Unless your insinuating that there are many racist teachers I dont understand why this is a problem.  As you are a minority it is probable that most teachers will not be of your race.[/b]

 ::)  Precisely! 
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: t... on April 03, 2008, 09:16:17 PM

Ghost what advantage have I ever received because I am White?

I'm white and well aware of the advantages I have because I'm white. And you are too. I'm also a woman and the daughter of working class parents who didn't go to college and yet I still realize, despite my gender/socioeconomic status, that in our society I was born on third base simply because of the color of my skin (and my parents' and their parents' and their parents'). Whatever your background may be - you were too.  But unlike you, I don't go around pretending that I hit a triple. 



What advantages? All you people talk about is "advantages you know you have."  Yet no one can name any. 

Here's a checklist for you, from sociologist Peggy McIntosh of Wellesley University:

___ 1. I can arrange to be in the company of people of my race most of the time.  There are many communities with more black people than white people, the same goes for other minorities.  Furthermore, why does this matter unless your assuming that a majority of White's are racist toward minorities which I do not believe is the case

___ 2. I can go shopping alone most of the time, pretty well assured that I will not be followed or harassed.  I do not think that a majority of minorities have been harassed and followed while going shopping any more than others.  If you go shopping in a big city there is a distinct possibility that you may be harassed by someone on the street asking for money regardless of what race you are.

___ 3. I can turn on the television or open to the front page of the paper and see people of my race widely represented. [Do you actually watch TV?  Blacks are considered a minority and are on many television shows and in the paper.  Most of the items in the front page of the paper are negative things anyway, would you want to be on the front page?  I also don't know of any WET (white entertainment television) where I can see people of my race almost exclusively.[/b]

___ 4. When I am told about our national heritage or about "civilization", I am shown that people of my color made it what it is. "I also don't remember any "white History month" and I have heard of many blacks who helped shape our country"

___ 5. I can be sure that my children will be given curricular materials that testify to the existence of their race.I dont even know what you are saying by this, I do not believe that many curricular materials say many races are not real.

___ 6. I can go into a music shop and count on finding the music of my race represented, into a supermarket and find the food I grew up with, into a hairdresser's shop and find someone who can deal with my hair.Really now, are you going to tell me that there are no minority music artists?  Supermarkets put up food that they can sell, and there are many supermarkets/restaurants which cater to different preferences

___ 7. Whether I use checks, credit cards, or cash, I can count on my skin color not to work against the appearance of financial responsibility.again your assuming people are racist, I doubt that a majority of minorities are made fun of for using credit cards, checks, or cash.  I have never seen a store that says "Caucasians can use whatever form of currency they would like, Minorities must pay in cash"

___ 8. I am not made acutely aware that my shape, bearing, or body odor will be taken as a reflection on my race.Neither are most minorities.  I will admit that there are some minorities who are generalized to "smell offensive" to other people.  I don't think it should result in said race getting rewarded in any way.

___ 9. I can worry about racism without being seen as self-interested or self-seeking.This works both ways.  I worry about racism (AA) or things like a Black beauty pagent and am told I am a self-interested, self-seeking, racist

___ 10. I can take a job or enroll in a college with an affirmative action policy without having my co-workers or peers assume I got it because of my race.SO TAKE AWAY AA and you will not have this problem...oh wait I doubt you really want to do that

___ 11. I can be late to a meeting without having the lateness reflect on my race.Again I do not believe most in the business world say certain minorities are more tardy than others.

___ 12. I can choose public accommodation with out fearing that people of my race cannot get in or will be mistreated.How many minorities are treated poorly in public accommodation any longer?  And there are some clubs and streets where it is not at all safe to be a white person.

___ 13. I am never asked to speak for all of the people of my racial group.Just was at the beginning of this post (although technically i'm not a WASP, but I am white

___ 14. I can be pretty sure that if I ask to talk with the"person in charge", I will be facing a person of my race.There are plenty of minority managers and leaders.  However, being as they are a minority, there are likely fewer than those of the majority.

___ 15. If a traffic cop pulls me over or if the IRS audits my tax return, I can be sure I haven't been singled out because of my race.so does this mean if a minority cop or woman cop pulls me over I can blame it on being a White male?  I just got a speeding ticket on the way back to campus for going 48 in a 35, with the 45 MPH sign literally 20 feet in front of me.

___ 16. I can easily by posters, postcards, picture books, greeting cards, dolls, toys, and children.s magazines featuring people of my race.again it depends on which minority you are in.  I believe business produce what there is consumer demand for.

___ 17. I can choose blemish cover or bandages in .flesh. color and have them more or less match my skin.are you kidding me!?  So start a business and make bandages that are the color of whatever your skin is if you think it will sell well enough for you to make money

___ 18. I can do well in a challenging situation without being called a credit to my race.I have been told many times that people are surprised what I am doing with my life considering where I came from.  I believe Bearly is probably the same way.

___ 19. I can walk into a classroom and know I will not be the only member of my race.Depends on where you go to school.  There are plenty of schools that are a majority of minority students.

___ 20. I can enroll in a class at college and be sure that the majority of my professors will be of my race.Unless your insinuating that there are many racist teachers I dont understand why this is a problem.  As you are a minority it is probable that most teachers will not be of your race.

HOLY


f-ing


*&^%.




ARE


YOU


FOR


REAL?



LIKE...


REALLY?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: lovethelaw2010 on April 03, 2008, 09:25:23 PM

Ghost what advantage have I ever received because I am White?

I'm white and well aware of the advantages I have because I'm white. And you are too. I'm also a woman and the daughter of working class parents who didn't go to college and yet I still realize, despite my gender/socioeconomic status, that in our society I was born on third base simply because of the color of my skin (and my parents' and their parents' and their parents'). Whatever your background may be - you were too.  But unlike you, I don't go around pretending that I hit a triple. 



What advantages? All you people talk about is "advantages you know you have."  Yet no one can name any. 

Here's a checklist for you, from sociologist Peggy McIntosh of Wellesley University:

___ 1. I can arrange to be in the company of people of my race most of the time.  There are many communities with more black people than white people, the same goes for other minorities.  Furthermore, why does this matter unless your assuming that a majority of White's are racist toward minorities which I do not believe is the case

___ 2. I can go shopping alone most of the time, pretty well assured that I will not be followed or harassed.  I do not think that a majority of minorities have been harassed and followed while going shopping any more than others.  If you go shopping in a big city there is a distinct possibility that you may be harassed by someone on the street asking for money regardless of what race you are.

___ 3. I can turn on the television or open to the front page of the paper and see people of my race widely represented. [Do you actually watch TV?  Blacks are considered a minority and are on many television shows and in the paper.  Most of the items in the front page of the paper are negative things anyway, would you want to be on the front page?  I also don't know of any WET (white entertainment television) where I can see people of my race almost exclusively.[/b]

___ 4. When I am told about our national heritage or about "civilization", I am shown that people of my color made it what it is. "I also don't remember any "white History month" and I have heard of many blacks who helped shape our country"

___ 5. I can be sure that my children will be given curricular materials that testify to the existence of their race.I dont even know what you are saying by this, I do not believe that many curricular materials say many races are not real.

___ 6. I can go into a music shop and count on finding the music of my race represented, into a supermarket and find the food I grew up with, into a hairdresser's shop and find someone who can deal with my hair.Really now, are you going to tell me that there are no minority music artists?  Supermarkets put up food that they can sell, and there are many supermarkets/restaurants which cater to different preferences

___ 7. Whether I use checks, credit cards, or cash, I can count on my skin color not to work against the appearance of financial responsibility.again your assuming people are racist, I doubt that a majority of minorities are made fun of for using credit cards, checks, or cash.  I have never seen a store that says "Caucasians can use whatever form of currency they would like, Minorities must pay in cash"

___ 8. I am not made acutely aware that my shape, bearing, or body odor will be taken as a reflection on my race.Neither are most minorities.  I will admit that there are some minorities who are generalized to "smell offensive" to other people.  I don't think it should result in said race getting rewarded in any way.

___ 9. I can worry about racism without being seen as self-interested or self-seeking.This works both ways.  I worry about racism (AA) or things like a Black beauty pagent and am told I am a self-interested, self-seeking, racist

___ 10. I can take a job or enroll in a college with an affirmative action policy without having my co-workers or peers assume I got it because of my race.SO TAKE AWAY AA and you will not have this problem...oh wait I doubt you really want to do that

___ 11. I can be late to a meeting without having the lateness reflect on my race.Again I do not believe most in the business world say certain minorities are more tardy than others.

___ 12. I can choose public accommodation with out fearing that people of my race cannot get in or will be mistreated.How many minorities are treated poorly in public accommodation any longer?  And there are some clubs and streets where it is not at all safe to be a white person.

___ 13. I am never asked to speak for all of the people of my racial group.Just was at the beginning of this post (although technically i'm not a WASP, but I am white

___ 14. I can be pretty sure that if I ask to talk with the"person in charge", I will be facing a person of my race.There are plenty of minority managers and leaders.  However, being as they are a minority, there are likely fewer than those of the majority.

___ 15. If a traffic cop pulls me over or if the IRS audits my tax return, I can be sure I haven't been singled out because of my race.so does this mean if a minority cop or woman cop pulls me over I can blame it on being a White male?  I just got a speeding ticket on the way back to campus for going 48 in a 35, with the 45 MPH sign literally 20 feet in front of me.

___ 16. I can easily by posters, postcards, picture books, greeting cards, dolls, toys, and children.s magazines featuring people of my race.again it depends on which minority you are in.  I believe business produce what there is consumer demand for.

___ 17. I can choose blemish cover or bandages in .flesh. color and have them more or less match my skin.are you kidding me!?  So start a business and make bandages that are the color of whatever your skin is if you think it will sell well enough for you to make money

___ 18. I can do well in a challenging situation without being called a credit to my race.I have been told many times that people are surprised what I am doing with my life considering where I came from.  I believe Bearly is probably the same way.

___ 19. I can walk into a classroom and know I will not be the only member of my race.Depends on where you go to school.  There are plenty of schools that are a majority of minority students.

___ 20. I can enroll in a class at college and be sure that the majority of my professors will be of my race.Unless your insinuating that there are many racist teachers I dont understand why this is a problem.  As you are a minority it is probable that most teachers will not be of your race.


This is great.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: MahlerGrooves on April 03, 2008, 09:27:50 PM
tag
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: LHL on April 03, 2008, 10:51:44 PM

Ghost what advantage have I ever received because I am White?

I'm white and well aware of the advantages I have because I'm white. And you are too. I'm also a woman and the daughter of working class parents who didn't go to college and yet I still realize, despite my gender/socioeconomic status, that in our society I was born on third base simply because of the color of my skin (and my parents' and their parents' and their parents'). Whatever your background may be - you were too.  But unlike you, I don't go around pretending that I hit a triple. 



What advantages? All you people talk about is "advantages you know you have."  Yet no one can name any. 

Here's a checklist for you, from sociologist Peggy McIntosh of Wellesley University:

___ 1. I can arrange to be in the company of people of my race most of the time.  There are many communities with more black people than white people, the same goes for other minorities.  Furthermore, why does this matter unless your assuming that a majority of White's are racist toward minorities which I do not believe is the case

___ 2. I can go shopping alone most of the time, pretty well assured that I will not be followed or harassed.  I do not think that a majority of minorities have been harassed and followed while going shopping any more than others.  If you go shopping in a big city there is a distinct possibility that you may be harassed by someone on the street asking for money regardless of what race you are.

___ 3. I can turn on the television or open to the front page of the paper and see people of my race widely represented. [Do you actually watch TV?  Blacks are considered a minority and are on many television shows and in the paper.  Most of the items in the front page of the paper are negative things anyway, would you want to be on the front page?  I also don't know of any WET (white entertainment television) where I can see people of my race almost exclusively.[/b]

___ 4. When I am told about our national heritage or about "civilization", I am shown that people of my color made it what it is. "I also don't remember any "white History month" and I have heard of many blacks who helped shape our country"

___ 5. I can be sure that my children will be given curricular materials that testify to the existence of their race.I dont even know what you are saying by this, I do not believe that many curricular materials say many races are not real.

___ 6. I can go into a music shop and count on finding the music of my race represented, into a supermarket and find the food I grew up with, into a hairdresser's shop and find someone who can deal with my hair.Really now, are you going to tell me that there are no minority music artists?  Supermarkets put up food that they can sell, and there are many supermarkets/restaurants which cater to different preferences

___ 7. Whether I use checks, credit cards, or cash, I can count on my skin color not to work against the appearance of financial responsibility.again your assuming people are racist, I doubt that a majority of minorities are made fun of for using credit cards, checks, or cash.  I have never seen a store that says "Caucasians can use whatever form of currency they would like, Minorities must pay in cash"

___ 8. I am not made acutely aware that my shape, bearing, or body odor will be taken as a reflection on my race.Neither are most minorities.  I will admit that there are some minorities who are generalized to "smell offensive" to other people.  I don't think it should result in said race getting rewarded in any way.

___ 9. I can worry about racism without being seen as self-interested or self-seeking.This works both ways.  I worry about racism (AA) or things like a Black beauty pagent and am told I am a self-interested, self-seeking, racist

___ 10. I can take a job or enroll in a college with an affirmative action policy without having my co-workers or peers assume I got it because of my race.SO TAKE AWAY AA and you will not have this problem...oh wait I doubt you really want to do that

___ 11. I can be late to a meeting without having the lateness reflect on my race.Again I do not believe most in the business world say certain minorities are more tardy than others.

___ 12. I can choose public accommodation with out fearing that people of my race cannot get in or will be mistreated.How many minorities are treated poorly in public accommodation any longer?  And there are some clubs and streets where it is not at all safe to be a white person.

___ 13. I am never asked to speak for all of the people of my racial group.Just was at the beginning of this post (although technically i'm not a WASP, but I am white

___ 14. I can be pretty sure that if I ask to talk with the"person in charge", I will be facing a person of my race.There are plenty of minority managers and leaders.  However, being as they are a minority, there are likely fewer than those of the majority.

___ 15. If a traffic cop pulls me over or if the IRS audits my tax return, I can be sure I haven't been singled out because of my race.so does this mean if a minority cop or woman cop pulls me over I can blame it on being a White male?  I just got a speeding ticket on the way back to campus for going 48 in a 35, with the 45 MPH sign literally 20 feet in front of me.

___ 16. I can easily by posters, postcards, picture books, greeting cards, dolls, toys, and children.s magazines featuring people of my race.again it depends on which minority you are in.  I believe business produce what there is consumer demand for.

___ 17. I can choose blemish cover or bandages in .flesh. color and have them more or less match my skin.are you kidding me!?  So start a business and make bandages that are the color of whatever your skin is if you think it will sell well enough for you to make money

___ 18. I can do well in a challenging situation without being called a credit to my race.I have been told many times that people are surprised what I am doing with my life considering where I came from.  I believe Bearly is probably the same way.

___ 19. I can walk into a classroom and know I will not be the only member of my race.Depends on where you go to school.  There are plenty of schools that are a majority of minority students.

___ 20. I can enroll in a class at college and be sure that the majority of my professors will be of my race.Unless your insinuating that there are many racist teachers I dont understand why this is a problem.  As you are a minority it is probable that most teachers will not be of your race.

Dude, I think you completely missed the point.  I would try to explain all this to you but I wouldn't know where to start.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 04, 2008, 03:15:59 AM
Do you really think you were going to get into that school anyway? Or is it some pseudo-noble, grand ideal of a meritocracy that you're falsely hiding behind?

Please, indulge us. Why the concern for "equality" now, in this very specific context?

You're it.

this is one of the less clever shticks that i've seen.

also the fact that you tagged ghost to make her "it" implies that you were previously "it", which is to say that you were the previous total idiot.  good job.

I llulzed.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 04, 2008, 03:17:07 AM
Please, indulge us. Why the concern for "equality" now, in this very specific context?

I don't get bent out of shape over AA, but what do you mean "why the concern for equality now in this very specific context?"  Do you think that the majority of people who are opposed to affirmative action only care about equality when they are negatively affected by policies that promote evaluating candidates based on characteristics like skin color?  I think most people want others to be treated equally regardless of factors like this.

I would disagree.

I think most are self-interested twerps who are largely concerned with other people having "advantages" they do not have, while completely ignoring the advantages they themselves have had in life.

At any rate, I'd just like to hear their rationale, whether they fit my perceptions or not. 



or are you the self-interested twerp that just wants an advantage?  Or maybe your just racist and think that black people aren't as smart or as strong of candidates regardless of other factors in their life?  Or maybe you are racist and just don't like white people?  Personally I don't think a person should receive advantages or disadvantages because of their skin color.  Furthermore, I think most people who disagree with AA wouldn't have as much of a problem with if it were based on factors such as socioeconomic status.


AA has nothing to do with intelligence.  It has to do with basic equality at the macro level.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 04, 2008, 03:28:57 AM

Ghost what advantage have I ever received because I am White?

I'm white and well aware of the advantages I have because I'm white. And you are too. I'm also a woman and the daughter of working class parents who didn't go to college and yet I still realize, despite my gender/socioeconomic status, that in our society I was born on third base simply because of the color of my skin (and my parents' and their parents' and their parents'). Whatever your background may be - you were too.  But unlike you, I don't go around pretending that I hit a triple. 



What advantages? All you people talk about is "advantages you know you have."  Yet no one can name any. 

Here's a checklist for you, from sociologist Peggy McIntosh of Wellesley University:

___ 1. I can arrange to be in the company of people of my race most of the time.

___ 2. I can go shopping alone most of the time, pretty well assured that I will not be followed or harassed.

___ 3. I can turn on the television or open to the front page of the paper and see people of my race widely represented.

___ 4. When I am told about our national heritage or about "civilization", I am shown that people of my color made it what it is.

___ 5. I can be sure that my children will be given curricular materials that testify to the existence of their race.

___ 6. I can go into a music shop and count on finding the music of my race represented, into a supermarket and find the food I grew up with, into a hairdresser's shop and find someone who can deal with my hair.

___ 7. Whether I use checks, credit cards, or cash, I can count on my skin color not to work against the appearance of financial responsibility.

___ 8. I am not made acutely aware that my shape, bearing, or body odor will be taken as a reflection on my race.

___ 9. I can worry about racism without being seen as self-interested or self-seeking.

___ 10. I can take a job or enroll in a college with an affirmative action policy without having my co-workers or peers assume I got it because of my race.

___ 11. I can be late to a meeting without having the lateness reflect on my race.

___ 12. I can choose public accommodation with out fearing that people of my race cannot get in or will be mistreated.

___ 13. I am never asked to speak for all of the people of my racial group.

___ 14. I can be pretty sure that if I ask to talk with the"person in charge", I will be facing a person of my race.

___ 15. If a traffic cop pulls me over or if the IRS audits my tax return, I can be sure I haven't been singled out because of my race.

___ 16. I can easily by posters, postcards, picture books, greeting cards, dolls, toys, and children.s magazines featuring people of my race.

___ 17. I can choose blemish cover or bandages in .flesh. color and have them more or less match my skin.

___ 18. I can do well in a challenging situation without being called a credit to my race.

___ 19. I can walk into a classroom and know I will not be the only member of my race.

___ 20. I can enroll in a class at college and be sure that the majority of my professors will be of my race.


Jesus, I was just thinking of this checklist as I was reading through this thread.  Not sure if it was the same one, but I remembered something very similar to it.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 04, 2008, 09:17:01 AM
that checklist is way to involved.  how about simply stating that if you're white, you have the luxury of being the "default" race and therefore have the option of not thinking of it as an issue if you choose to do so?
My circle of friends is multiracial, and noone I know makes an issue of their race.

Some people (Farrakhan, Nation of Islam, etc.) choose to make a huge issue of their race. Some other people (David Duke, The KKK, etc.) also make a huge issue of their race. Why is the fact that there are some racists in every ethnic group something that gives white people privileges over black people?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: jack24 on April 04, 2008, 09:32:33 AM
Oh Reez.  I really should know better than to jump in on this debate after the logical beat down you put on me last time we talked.

I believe that you are absolutely right about what you said, but I don't think AA is doing anything to fix the problem of institutional racism. 
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 04, 2008, 09:36:12 AM
Quote
who said anything about racists?  i'm talking about the default.  being white is "normal."
Why is "normal" good? White people are commonly stereotyped for being bland, boring, culturally vacant. Heck, even in this thread, there have been multiple assertions that just by the virtue of having white skin, people can't relate to struggle. In popular media, most villains tend to be white men. In liberal classrooms, white men are blamed for all the world's wrongs. We get no history month, and there is no celebration of our cultural identity. When we go to job interviews, we are seen as just another bland, uninteresting stuffed suit - regardless of actual background.

I don't get it. What's the big advantage to being "normal"?


Quote
also, your experience might be somewhat atypical due to location.
TITCR. I live in NYC, grew up in a multicultural environment, and don't have many hangups about race. My uncle is Indian, and the last girlfriend I loved was half-black. I know that to a lot of people, these kinds of experiences may be atypical - but that's the whole point I am trying to make: The macro assumption that "white people" have some kind of advantage completely ignores the micro reality that all people are individuals - with their own private histories, battles, and struggles.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 04, 2008, 09:50:13 AM
I believe that you are absolutely right about what you said, but I don't think AA is doing anything to fix the problem of institutional racism. 

to the extent that it helps in increasing the number of people among the elite classes who are from minority backgrounds, it actually does address the problem.  however i don't think that anyone would consider aa to be much more than a stopgap.
TITCR and this is the primary reason I support AA! The point of AA is not to give jobs to people who don't deserve them. The main and most legitimate point of AA is to create a macro system where there is a significant amount of successful minority role-models that will inspire new generations of minorities to rise up and attain their own success.

The doll experiment that was done for Brown v. Board is exactly the kind of thing that AA is meant to fight. Little African American boys and girls should be able to grow up in an environment where they truly believe that if they work really hard, they can become doctors, lawyers, businessmen and scientists. Until we have this kind of environment, AA is a terrible solution, but it's the only one we have.

Darker-colored bandaids have nothing to do with it.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: SteelersandGators on April 04, 2008, 10:13:11 AM
I believe that you are absolutely right about what you said, but I don't think AA is doing anything to fix the problem of institutional racism. 

to the extent that it helps in increasing the number of people among the elite classes who are from minority backgrounds, it actually does address the problem.  however i don't think that anyone would consider aa to be much more than a stopgap.
TITCR and this is the primary reason I support AA! The point of AA is not to give jobs to people who don't deserve them. The main and most legitimate point of AA is to create a macro system where there is a significant amount of successful minority role-models that will inspire new generations of minorities to rise up and attain their own success.The doll experiment that was done for Brown v. Board is exactly the kind of thing that AA is meant to fight. Little African American boys and girls should be able to grow up in an environment where they truly believe that if they work really hard, they can become doctors, lawyers, businessmen and scientists. Until we have this kind of environment, AA is a terrible solution, but it's the only one we have.

Darker-colored bandaids have nothing to do with it.

Bearly, this is the FIRST legitimately good argument I've heard in favor of AA. I'm usually opposed to AA and the way it's used, but this is a good point.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 04, 2008, 10:16:54 AM
Quote
who said anything about racists?  i'm talking about the default.  being white is "normal."
Why is "normal" good? White people are commonly stereotyped for being bland, boring, culturally vacant. Heck, even in this thread, there have been multiple assertions that just by the virtue of having white skin, people can't relate to struggle. In popular media, most villains tend to be white men. In liberal classrooms, white men are blamed for all the world's wrongs. We get no history month, and there is no celebration of our cultural identity. When we go to job interviews, we are seen as just another bland, uninteresting stuffed suit - regardless of actual background.

I don't get it. What's the big advantage to being "normal"?


Quote
also, your experience might be somewhat atypical due to location.
TITCR. I live in NYC, grew up in a multicultural environment, and don't have many hangups about race. My uncle is Indian, and the last girlfriend I loved was half-black. I know that to a lot of people, these kinds of experiences may be atypical - but that's the whole point I am trying to make: The macro assumption that "white people" have some kind of advantage completely ignores the micro reality that all people are individuals - with their own private histories, battles, and struggles.


White people - white men in particular - don't need a history month, dude. That's the point. There's a black history month, a women's history month, a whatever history month because history as it is taught is white male history. That may be changing, but that doesn't change the fact that the reason we have these things is because there was/is a deficiency in the way our society has addressed history. Not because black history, women's history, etc., are more celebrated, but precisely because they have been ignored. If you'd like, we can refer to every month without a special designation as white male history month. Would that make you feel better?

I empathize with some of the things you're saying here (and I think that you're greatly exaggerating other points), but not as an argument against the idea of white privilege.

Yes, people are individuals. Yes, people have different experiences. White privilege doesn't mean that every white person has an easy, awesome, rainbow-and-sunshine filled life. White privilege means that there are certain benefits that come along with being the dominant classification. Those benefits may operate differently, and more or less prominently, depending on your subject position, but they are there.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 04, 2008, 10:38:26 AM
Quote
White people - white men in particular - don't need a history month, dude. That's the point. There's a black history month, a women's history month, a whatever history month because history as it is taught is white male history. That may be changing, but that doesn't change the fact that the reason we have these things is because there was/is a deficiency in the way our society has addressed history. Not because black history, women's history, etc., are more celebrated, but precisely because they have been ignored. If you'd like, we can refer to every month without a special designation as white male history month. Would that make you feel better?
No it wouldn't. Because there is no such thing as a "White Male". I have never in my life taken a history class that has ever said *anything* positive about my culture. In every history class I have taken, Russian people have been portrayed as *at best* bumbling fools, and at worst powermad communist imperialists.

I have taken dozens of classes where the (truly inspiring) accomplishments of Booker T. Washington, Maya Angelou, George Washington Carver, Martin Luther King, and others were made very clear to me. But it took significant independent research to find out about the equally significant accomplishments of Soia Mentchikoff, Pitirim Sorokin, and Igor Sikorsky.

Race is a social construction, and the American Educational system tries to forcefeed me bull$hit about how *my* ancestors killed the Native Americans, and enslaved Africans. I don't know who these "white men" who dominate the American History curriculum are, but they sure as hell aren't my ancestors, and they aren't the ancestors of the vast majority of so called "white" people living in the United States today.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: jack24 on April 04, 2008, 10:43:02 AM
I think most people know that all whites don't have it easy.

77% of the citizens in this country are white, (not counting illegal immigrants)
and only 17% make over 100k per year
(according to bestplaces.net demographic information)

I do understand that a lot of people by default consider "white behavior" to be "normal behavior" and that is truly regrettable.

In my personal opinion, if you have the opportunity to crack into that 17% of people who make more than 100k per year, you really don't have room to complain no matter what color you skin is.  Money isn't everything, but if you make money you have A LOT OF OPPORTUNITIES.

You can argue that being white brings privilege and I won't disagree, but I think it's pretty well established that money brings even more.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 04, 2008, 11:38:45 AM
that checklist is way to involved.  how about simply stating that if you're white, you have the luxury of being the "default" race and therefore have the option of not thinking of it as an issue if you choose to do so?
My circle of friends is multiracial, and noone I know makes an issue of their race.

Some people (Farrakhan, Nation of Islam, etc.) choose to make a huge issue of their race. Some other people (David Duke, The KKK, etc.) also make a huge issue of their race. Why is the fact that there are some racists in every ethnic group something that gives white people privileges over black people?

What a strange logical disconnect.  This is not the argument anyone is making.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 04, 2008, 11:54:30 AM
that checklist is way to involved.  how about simply stating that if you're white, you have the luxury of being the "default" race and therefore have the option of not thinking of it as an issue if you choose to do so?
My circle of friends is multiracial, and noone I know makes an issue of their race.

Some people (Farrakhan, Nation of Islam, etc.) choose to make a huge issue of their race. Some other people (David Duke, The KKK, etc.) also make a huge issue of their race. Why is the fact that there are some racists in every ethnic group something that gives white people privileges over black people?

What a strange logical disconnect.  This is not the argument anyone is making.

The argument I am making above is that racialism and racism go hand in hand. One can be a member of a given race and not spend all their time focused on the implications of what it means to be a member of that race.

When I moved to the US, there was a significant emphasis on cultural integration. So yeah, I am ethnically Russian, but I consider myself an American - the same as any Black, Asian or Latino American. I'm no better or worse than any of these groups because I am an American, and so are they. And while my mom was asked whether she could "afford" to visit the four seasons a while ago by a stupid waiter because she spoke with a Russian accent, I wasn't too offended, because I realize that there are ignorant people out there - I didn't go and yell at the manager and complain that we had been victimized.

There are people out there who chose to focus on differences, but there are plenty of other people who chose to focus on the similarities. If you choose to focus on the differences between races and cultures, when the similarities are so much more profound, you are, in essence, a closet racist. Claiming "white privilege" because it's a bit harder to find a tan colored bandaid is just one example of this kind of ridiculous racialist thinking. There are more beige bandaids in the US because there are more beige people in the US. There are more "white" people in the media because there are more "white" people in the US.  - This isn't evidence of some kind of privilege - it's evidence of paranoid thinking on the part of civil rights leaders who were raised in an era when there really *was* a systematic and tangible, government-supported conspiracy to benefit "white" people.

If the differences continue to be emphasized by academics and civil rights leaders more than the similarities, Race will continue to be a tangible social construct, and there will be a permanent racial divide in this country. I don't think that's a positive thing, and that's why I made those statements.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 04, 2008, 11:54:54 AM
Quote
White people - white men in particular - don't need a history month, dude. That's the point. There's a black history month, a women's history month, a whatever history month because history as it is taught is white male history. That may be changing, but that doesn't change the fact that the reason we have these things is because there was/is a deficiency in the way our society has addressed history. Not because black history, women's history, etc., are more celebrated, but precisely because they have been ignored. If you'd like, we can refer to every month without a special designation as white male history month. Would that make you feel better?
No it wouldn't. Because there is no such thing as a "White Male". I have never in my life taken a history class that has ever said *anything* positive about my culture. In every history class I have taken, Russian people have been portrayed as *at best* bumbling fools, and at worst powermad communist imperialists.

I have taken dozens of classes where the (truly inspiring) accomplishments of Booker T. Washington, Maya Angelou, George Washington Carver, Martin Luther King, and others were made very clear to me. But it took significant independent research to find out about the equally significant accomplishments of Soia Mentchikoff, Pitirim Sorokin, and Igor Sikorsky.

Race is a social construction, and the American Educational system tries to forcefeed me bull$hit about how *my* ancestors killed the Native Americans, and enslaved Africans. I don't know who these "white men" who dominate the American History curriculum are, but they sure as hell aren't my ancestors, and they aren't the ancestors of the vast majority of so called "white" people living in the United States today.

Here's the problem, dude. The assertion that I was responding to claimed that "we," referring to white people, don't get a history month. Further personalizing it changes the issue. Perhaps I missed the point of what you were saying. Nonetheless:

No one is saying that there aren't other problems with the way that our society sees/teaches history, with the way our society operates in general. Gee, I wonder why there might be issues with the way Russian history is taught in the United States? It's not surprising in the least to me that there are. That doesn't make it unproblematic. But that also doesn't mean that it's an argument against the idea of white privilege.

There are a few important things to note here.

1. Most white Americans don't have the same cultural identity that you do. Most white Americans don't have much of any cultural identity beyond being "American" and maybe celebrating St. Patrick's Day with green beer. I'm not saying that there aren't elements here that are problematic, indicative of the melting pot idea that wiped out the unique identities of many immigrants (I'm also not saying that there's anything wrong with green beer). Sure, I've bemoaned the fact that I don't know anything about what it means to be Swedish, that although my grandmother spoke Swedish fluently she kept it from my father because she wanted him to be more "American". It's unfortunate. It's also one of the dilemmas that faces a nation of immigrants: how do you make a cohesive whole from disparate parts? But there's also an element of privilege for those who have adopted "American" as their identity. (Also, being Swedish is as much a construct as is being American. It's just, you know, an older identity). And the negative aspects don't take that privilege away.

2. For many of the ways that white privilege operates, what your personal ethnic identity is doesn't matter. Yes, the idea of the "white male" is a social construct. It's overly simplistic. I'm not going to argue with that. The problem is that white privilege is a social force: it operates within, on, because of social constructs like the "white male". While (because your Russian heritage is important to you) some elements of white privilege may operate differently on you (the way history is taught, for instance, as we've been discussing), many elements of white privilege aren't about how you feel, but rather about how society feels about you. It's not about who you are, but rather who society thinks you are. Again, as I note above, there are problems with this, but that doesn't erase the privilege. Furthermore, race in general being a construct doesn't mean that it doesn't matter and doesn't operate in our society.

3. Again, "white privilege" is a broad concept, one that operates differently in the lives of different people. Maybe certain elements don't apply, or don't apply as strongly, to you. That doesn't mean that it doesn't operate in your life and in the lives of other people. White privilege != all white people have it easy. White privilege != all white people are the same. White privilege != whiteness, blackness, whateverness are not socially constructed. White privilege DOES mean that ideas about race, ideas about whiteness in particular, operate in important, sometimes subtle, ways - ways that grant privileges. And you can acknowledge that without losing your identity, without saying that being white = life is easy, without legitimizing the social constructions that give rise to white privilege. You can acknowledge it while having conversations about why these issues are complicated.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 04, 2008, 11:58:39 AM
I believe that you are absolutely right about what you said, but I don't think AA is doing anything to fix the problem of institutional racism. 

to the extent that it helps in increasing the number of people among the elite classes who are from minority backgrounds, it actually does address the problem.  however i don't think that anyone would consider aa to be much more than a stopgap.
TITCR and this is the primary reason I support AA! The point of AA is not to give jobs to people who don't deserve them. The main and most legitimate point of AA is to create a macro system where there is a significant amount of successful minority role-models that will inspire new generations of minorities to rise up and attain their own success.The doll experiment that was done for Brown v. Board is exactly the kind of thing that AA is meant to fight. Little African American boys and girls should be able to grow up in an environment where they truly believe that if they work really hard, they can become doctors, lawyers, businessmen and scientists. Until we have this kind of environment, AA is a terrible solution, but it's the only one we have.

Darker-colored bandaids have nothing to do with it.

Bearly, this is the FIRST legitimately good argument I've heard in favor of AA. I'm usually opposed to AA and the way it's used, but this is a good point.


::smh::
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 04, 2008, 12:17:02 PM
Quote
Here's the problem, dude. The assertion that I was responding to claimed that "we," referring to white people, don't get a history month. Further personalizing it changes the issue. Perhaps I missed the point of what you were saying. Nonetheless:

No one is saying that there aren't other problems with the way that our society sees/teaches history, with the way our society operates in general. Gee, I wonder why there might be issues with the way Russian history is taught in the United States? It's not surprising in the least to me that there are. That doesn't make it unproblematic. But that also doesn't mean that it's an argument against the idea of white privilege.
My answer was in response directly to the assertion that every month is "white history month", when in fact, there is no such thing as "white history". I used my Russian cultural identity as an example of why the concept that "white" people have the advantage of public historical awareness of their race's accomplishments is deeply flawed.



Quote
1. Most white Americans don't have the same cultural identity that you do. Most white Americans don't have much of any cultural identity beyond being "American" and maybe celebrating St. Patrick's Day with green beer. I'm not saying that there aren't elements here that are problematic, indicative of the melting pot idea that wiped out the unique identities of many immigrants (I'm also not saying that there's anything wrong with green beer). Sure, I've bemoaned the fact that I don't know anything about what it means to be Swedish, that although my grandmother spoke Swedish fluently she kept it from my father because she wanted him to be more "American". It's unfortunate. It's also one of the dilemmas that faces a nation of immigrants: how do you make a cohesive whole from disparate parts? But there's also an element of privilege for those who have adopted "American" as their identity. (Also, being Swedish is as much a construct as is being American. It's just, you know, an older identity). And the negative aspects don't take that privilege away.
Most white Americans don't have any cultural identity specifically because they chose to come to the US, destroy their cultural norms, and accept being *American* rather than Irish, Italian, Russian, Swedish, Etc. There are no "Swedish Studies" departments at universities, but there are "African American Studies" departments. You are saying that the assimilation of Europeans into mainstream American society has produced benefits for said Europeans - wouldn't it follow that the assimilation of African Americans into mainstream American society produce benefits for said African Americans?

Quote
2. For many of the ways that white privilege operates, what your personal ethnic identity is doesn't matter. Yes, the idea of the "white male" is a social construct. It's overly simplistic. I'm not going to argue with that. The problem is that white privilege is a social force: it operates within, on, because of social constructs like the "white male". While (because your Russian heritage is important to you) some elements of white privilege may operate differently on you (the way history is taught, for instance, as we've been discussing), many elements of white privilege aren't about how you feel, but rather about how society feels about you. It's not about who you are, but rather who society thinks you are. Again, as I note above, there are problems with this, but that doesn't erase the privilege. Furthermore, race in general being a construct doesn't mean that it doesn't matter and doesn't operate in our society.
Here is how society used to think of IRISH people:
(http://www.rzuser.uni-heidelberg.de/~el6/presentations/Irish_Americans_S2_WS2003/foto/Image7.gif)

The largest mass-lynching against any ethnic group in US History took place against ITALIANS.

The first and most severe federal restriction to Immigration took place against the CHINESE.

The only federally mandated racial-based imprisonment in the last century took place agains the ITALIANS and the JAPANESE.

Noone thought of these groups as being white a hundred years ago. Why are they "white" now? Because upon shedding their own cultural identity, they have willingly allowed the US to assimilate them.

Quote
3. Again, "white privilege" is a broad concept, one that operates differently in the lives of different people. Maybe certain elements don't apply, or don't apply as strongly, to you. That doesn't mean that it doesn't operate in your life and in the lives of other people. White privilege != all white people have it easy. White privilege != all white people are the same. White privilege != whiteness, blackness, whateverness are not socially constructed. White privilege DOES mean that ideas about race, ideas about whiteness in particular, operate in important, sometimes subtle, ways - ways that grant privileges. And you can acknowledge that without losing your identity, without saying that being white = life is easy, without legitimizing the social constructions that give rise to white privilege. You can acknowledge it while having conversations about why these issues are complicated.
TITCR.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 04, 2008, 12:19:26 PM
Good god, could you miss the point by any wider margin?

I quit.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 04, 2008, 12:22:47 PM
Good god, could you miss the point by any wider margin?

I quit.
I'm sorry. You keep saying. "White Privilege Exists! It's true!". Well I am sorry, just because you say it's true, and because hundreds of academics who forged their careers while fighting de facto and de jure white privilege in the 70's  say it's true doesn't make it true in the present day.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 04, 2008, 12:26:25 PM
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3495/is_2_48/ai_97873146
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 04, 2008, 12:30:27 PM
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3495/is_2_48/ai_97873146
(REDACTED)

If you name your child something that doesn't fit into main-stream society, and there is a bias against that, it's not something that proves white privilege. My black friend Everett had no problem finding his job.

Edit: This is also why my Korean friend Jin-Hue puts "John" on his resume. White privilege?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 04, 2008, 12:37:23 PM
 ::)

Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 04, 2008, 12:42:13 PM
::)


Whatever, Cady.

I'm presenting ideas that take into account a little bit more than the past 50 years of white-guilt driven sociological academia, and in response, I get eyerolls.

Do the African Americans in this country have a terrible and abusive history? Absolutely.
Do we need to take steps to give the macro-level ethnic group a more even footing in our society? Absolutely.
Is there some kind of identifiable or tangible advantage to simply having lighter skin? Absolutely not. I would take Claudio Simpkins' life over my own any day.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 04, 2008, 12:43:53 PM
Yeah...that's exactly what you're doing.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 04, 2008, 12:45:01 PM
Yeah...that's exactly what you're doing.
What's exactly what I am doing?  ???
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 04, 2008, 12:54:40 PM
Is there some kind of identifiable or tangible advantage to simply having lighter skin? Absolutely not. I would take Claudio Simpkins' life over my own any day.

you want to be on the side of a bus?

more to the point, you acknowledged somewhere else that aa helps build the idea that young black kids can grow up to be doctors, scientists, lawyers, etc.  doesn't that suggest that the idea is pretty weak at the moment?  this in and of itself can be a major disadvantage, don't you think?
Being on the side of a bus for getting HLS from CUNY when I grew up in a comfortable middle-class family would be very nice. Yes, I would want that.

More on subject, I totally advocate for AA as a means to achieving greater professional parity and as a tool to help young children aim higher.

But there are plenty of trailer parks where white kids grow up not having any clue that they are capable of doing something besides selling propane or joining the military. Their white skin doesn't give them this advantage anymore than it would to a light-skinned black child growing up in South Bronx.

Edit: To clarify, a black child whose father is an associate at Skadden has far more exposure to the kind of advantages that I am talking about than a white child who lives in Camden, NJ. The skin color doesn't factor into this equation very much at all.

Skin color does become important on a macro level, though, where black people have achieved positions of social status in volumes that are not proportional to their numbers in the population at large. What this means is that a black child is *more likely* to have an insufficient amount of role-models than a white child.

But it's a huge mistake to say that people are privileged for being "white", when in fact, they are privileged for being  socio-economically advantaged. Millions of white people don't have these socio-economic advantages. Assuming that they are privileged simply for their skin color is wrong.

Is a white orphan kid that grows up in foster homes and spends his life in prison "privileged?" No, he's not.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: filet o' fish on April 04, 2008, 10:22:51 PM
::)


Whatever, Cady.

I'm presenting ideas that take into account a little bit more than the past 50 years of white-guilt driven sociological academia, and in response, I get eyerolls.

Reread what you just posted, and ask yourself why you're getting eyerolls. You can't dismiss "50 years of white-guilt driven sociological academia" as misguided, agenda-driven nonsense simply because you believe you know better that that.

Do the African Americans in this country have a terrible and abusive history? Absolutely.

I'm glad you admit this, and implicitly, that history matters. Now turn your head and admit that these mainstream ideas, centered around the black person as being inhuman or subhuman, are not that far in the past. It's not a stretch to think there are residual impacts of that theme.

Do we need to take steps to give the macro-level ethnic group a more even footing in our society? Absolutely.

Hooray, you're not hopeless.

As hairless guinea pig said earlier, there are some strange disconnects in your thoughts...

Is there some kind of identifiable or tangible advantage to simply having lighter skin? Absolutely not. I would take Claudio Simpkins' life over my own any day.

Such as here.

Here's an obvious advantage: most CEO's and business owners will, all other things being equal, and not beholden to diversity laws, hire a white person over a black person.

Perhaps it's because you're in New York that you have a very limited experience of what race is in America. In most places in the US, outside of a handful of large cities, a black person is an outsider, even more so than an Asian, Native American, or Hispanic (though I would argue that a Muslim is probably very quickly gaining a notoriety and distrust because of this bull association with radical Islamics). People in America still largely distrust black people, but men especially, and even fear them.

Don't believe me? Visit any large message board or blog, with a huge population of posters from around the US. Or even better - ask a black person how they feel about being in small town, rural America. And then ask a white person how she might feel in, say, parts of Detroit or New Orleans or wherever.

Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 04, 2008, 10:53:18 PM
Quote
Reread what you just posted, and ask yourself why you're getting eyerolls. You can't dismiss "50 years of white-guilt driven sociological academia" as misguided, agenda-driven nonsense simply because you believe you know better that that.
At one point the best academia on the subject of racial relations asserted that African Americans were somehow genetically inferior to whites. Clearly, this is bull$hit. Social Academia tends to be a self-propagating group of closed-minded people who reiterate the same or similar beliefs until the next groundbreaking  movement occurs. I'm not saying that sociology is not a legitimate field - I am just saying that it's an extremely complex one that tends to evolve. The understanding of the social construct of "whiteness" as understood by popular contemporary American sociologists is in my experience simply inadequate.

Quote
Now turn your head and admit that these mainstream ideas, centered around the black person as being inhuman or subhuman, are not that far in the past. It's not a stretch to think there are residual impacts of that theme.
Indeed, there are remnants of these attitudes in modern day society. And yet the mainstream ideas that Jews, Polaks, Russians, Italians, Irish, Chinese, and Japanese people  are subhuman or inhuman are not very far in the past either. My only qualm is with the idea of "white privilege" - there may well be a significant amount of privilege for people whose families have historically dominated the American socioeconomic landscape, but this privilege does not extend to people who in the recent past have been equated to dogs.


Quote
Hooray, you're not hopeless.
Thank you. I do understand the history of this country, and I do get why many black people have the right to be very upset with their lot here. But so do many white people. That's my entire point.

Quote
Here's an obvious advantage: most CEO's and business owners will, all other things being equal, and not beholden to diversity laws, hire a white person over a black person.
In my experience this is simply not true. For example, in my firm, we have begun to actively go out and recruit associates of color, because we want to fight the impression that we are a racist firm. This isn't due to any law against racism - this is due to the fact that clients demand that their legal advisers are representatively diverse. It's no longer socially acceptable or profitable to be racist in the America I know. This is a good thing. It's been a long time coming!

Quote
Perhaps it's because you're in New York that you have a very limited experience of what race is in America. In most places in the US, outside of a handful of large cities, a black person is an outsider, even more so than an Asian, Native American, or Hispanic (though I would argue that a Muslim is probably very quickly gaining a notoriety and distrust because of this bull association with radical Islamics). People in America still largely distrust black people, but men especially, and even fear them.
I will grant you that. My opinion is by definition subjective. But here's the crux of the argument - in the enviornment where I grew up, being white was a huge *dis*advantage, and so I think it is unfair to say that people are priviledged just by being white. This is my entire bone to pick. The idea that *all* white people are being placed into one silly classification is every bit as racist as the idea that all black people should be considered the same.

The whole concept of race is a bull$hit way to classify people, and propagating the myth that *all* people of one race or another have *anything* in common is not something that I agree with.


Quote
Don't believe me? Visit any large message board or blog, with a huge population of posters from around the US. Or even better - ask a black person how they feel about being in small town, rural America. And then ask a white person how she might feel in, say, parts of Detroit or New Orleans or wherever.
I do believe you. I don't think your post disagrees with my beliefs in any way. I think you and I are basically of the same opinion on this matter. As I said, there is a macro problem in America. I readily adhere to this belief. What I don't necessarily buy is that a macro issue necessarily affects all individuals on a micro level. It simply does not.

There are many disadvantaged white kids. There are many disadvantaged black kids. There are far more advantaged white kids than black kids, I concede that; but that doesn't do much good for the individual white kids who have to struggle to survive. To then call these kids recipients of some kind of "white privilege" is both disingenuous and harmful to a productive dialogue on race in America.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: devilishlyblue on April 05, 2008, 01:38:48 AM
And then ask a white person how she might feel in, say, parts of Detroit or New Orleans or wherever.

I've always been curious to see a study on this -- surveys of random people taken to various neighborhoods, asking them about their perception of the crime rate, and then comparing it to an actual crime rate.  Is there a perfect correlation to actual crime rates?  (I'd be surprised if that were true.)  If there is a bias, is it from poorly maintained buildings?  The race of the occupants?  Percent of mental illness?  Etc.  I'd be curious to see a multivariable regression on the subject: what percent of the variation in crime perception is actually explained by crime rates?  Race?  Average building age?  Etc.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: yoyodawg on April 05, 2008, 09:16:24 AM
This whole thread is hella gay.

Come on...lets get those angry replies started now...you know the one's where you say "You're being a homo-phobe" or the ones where you say "That's not acceptable language.." etc....etc...

Anything to get us off this ridiculous, over-used discussion, about a use-less policy that perpetuates the myth that African-Americans can't possibly help themselves (40 years after the civil rights movement of all things) and we (us elitist and all powerful white-folk) are actually doing them a favor by giving them a "helping hand" that they need. (or want)

There's some more ammo for you too.  ;) Enjoy.

Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: ls2010 on April 05, 2008, 11:04:58 AM
I rarely venture to this side of the board.  I honestly dont even remember who said what at this point so try to take my comments for what they are worth....$.02.

Quote
White people - white men in particular - don't need a history month, dude. That's the point. There's a black history month, a women's history month, a whatever history month because history as it is taught is white male history. That may be changing, but that doesn't change the fact that the reason we have these things is because there was/is a deficiency in the way our society has addressed history. Not because black history, women's history, etc., are more celebrated, but precisely because they have been ignored. If you'd like, we can refer to every month without a special designation as white male history month. Would that make you feel better?
No it wouldn't. Because there is no such thing as a "White Male". I have never in my life taken a history class that has ever said *anything* positive about my culture. In every history class I have taken, Russian people have been portrayed as *at best* bumbling fools, and at worst powermad communist imperialists. No such thing as a white male?  You later say your family gave up much of its culture to simply be "american" <--this is WHITE MALE...and this is a part of privilege.  The fact that you have that luxury.  The fact is that, if someone of color wanted to "give up" their culture, they could only to a certain extent.  THere would be many in society who no matter what, would only see a Black person.

Race is a social construction, and the American Educational system tries to forcefeed me bull$hit about how *my* ancestors killed the Native Americans, and enslaved Africans. I don't know who these "white men" who dominate the American History curriculum are, but they sure as hell aren't my ancestors, and they aren't the ancestors of the vast majority of so called "white" people living in the United States today.
  How are you able to ascertain the ancestry of the majority of white people in this country?  It is one thing to say they are not YOURS, but that just seems like a convenient assumption.  Actually, many families have been here for generations (black and white) and have benefited from the social constructions that society created since the mass murder of the Native Americans and enslavement of Africans.


I actually find it quite sad that you don't think white Americans have a cultural identity!  This is also a huge indication of WHITE PRIVILEGE.  It's like you view WHITENESS as such the norm, that it's not even considered "culture", it's just American.  Think about this....4th of July-Independence Day....It's an American holiday but who was REALLY gaining freedom?  Whites in America, not blacks, and surely not the few Native Americans that still existed.  But there is no Emancipation Day and we can both bet a pretty valuable body part that if there were, it would not be widely celebrated by all races (Disagree? what did you do last Juneteenth?  What celebrations happened on TV, in Times Square?).  Thanksgiving--surely you don't assume that Native Americans are thankful for Pilgrims coming and raping and stealing their land, spreading diseases from Europe.  and killing most of their community?  There were blacks in America by this time point, many who had came on previous voyages but they too had nothing to celebrate.  See, there is a way of mainstreaming WHITENESS as AMERICAN-Ness.  I think the reason some on this board are so frustrated with you is because you refuse to acknowledge these most basic principles.

Please google the Clark Doll Study.  In dealing with education for some, students sit down and realize that people that looked like them had the smarts and finances to sail across the world, "find" a new place (how do you find something that has already been discovered?  There were civilizations already set up in America but because White (men) had the privilege of writing history, they "discovered"), tame an entire race of people, and set up shop as what we now think of as one of the best countries in the world. 

Now there are some students who walk in and learn that people that looked like them were stolen and brought to a place and forced to give up their culture, their language, their families, their religions, and start brand new so they could be molded into a subservient role in order to build a nation.  NOw of course this isn't where the history of blacks starts (not even in America.  Read a book called, "They Came Before Columbus") but again, because Blacks did not have the PRIVILEGE of writing their own history, it's most important parts have been omitted.

Also, please do not operate with the faulty notion that IMMIGRATING to  America is the same as being RAPED, BEATEN, STOLEN, and KIDNAPPED.  There are real differences and real consequences.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 05, 2008, 11:09:59 AM
^-- You clearly haven't read my posts so I will not reply to yours.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 05, 2008, 01:16:46 PM
Cady, omg, this thread.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 05, 2008, 01:29:42 PM
Cady, omg, this thread.

I tried?

ETA: I'm going to say one final thing to Bearly and anyone else who thinks that his arguments are just so insightful and amazing - something I think that you, Bearly, are completely missing. Acknowledging white privilege is not the same as saying that white privilege is the only operating force in the lives of people in this country. It is an operating force. Yes, wealth/the lack thereof and interrelated class issues also have a role. Yes, geography plays a role. Yes, other personal issues/characteristics are important. As I have been saying all along, white privilege is not about saying that all white people are the same or have the same experience. If you were willing to look past a knee-jerk reaction that "omg all white people aren't the same and my life is hard too," you might be able to recognize that.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 05, 2008, 01:40:33 PM
Cady, omg, this thread.

I tried?



No, I saw. It's just..."What white privilege? I don't feel privileged!" over and over and over...oy.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 05, 2008, 01:47:43 PM
Cady, omg, this thread.

I tried?



No, I saw. It's just..."What white privilege? I don't feel privileged!" over and over and over...oy.

As a white person, I feel that my life is hard!
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 05, 2008, 01:48:26 PM
As a white person, I feel my penis is hard.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 05, 2008, 01:49:24 PM
As a white person, I feel my penis is hard.


I feel that too.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: goaliechica on April 05, 2008, 01:51:40 PM
As a white person, I feel my penis is hard.


lulz
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 05, 2008, 02:52:28 PM
BitchPhD has a very timely post up here (http://bitchphd.blogspot.com/2008/04/legacy.html), which includes a discussion of white privilege and redlining minority neighborhoods.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 05, 2008, 03:27:21 PM
BitchPhD has a very timely post up here (http://bitchphd.blogspot.com/2008/04/legacy.html), which includes a discussion of white privilege and redlining minority neighborhoods.
I liked her post, and the description of the long-term economic impact of housing and other discrimination is 100% correct.

For the 75.2% of whites who own property, this is a pretty clear advantage. But what of the 24.8% of whites who own no property, and others who do not come from families that were able to capitalize on the advantages of pre-civil rights laws? For them, these advantages don't exist. Many of them live in the ghetto or in conditions of squalor in double-wide trailer homes, no better than poor African Americans.

The author makes an excellent point:
Quote
If your folks owned their own home, if they made middle-class wages, if they went to college, then they damn well *did* benefit from racism--consciously or no--and that benefit was certainly passed on to you in the form of educational opportunities, educational expectations, the ability to pay for poo like summer camps and after school programs, access to things like museums and music lessons, boy scouts or 4H programs, organized sports and community swimming pools, borrowing down payments from grandma and grandpa, knowing about financial aid forms because mom and dad filled 'em out back in their own day, and all sorts of other hard economic advantages.

But there are tens of millions of white people whose folks never owned a thing, who didn't go to college, who weren't even necessarily in the US to benefit from racism --consciously or no-- and therefore that benefit was not passed on to them in any form.

Again, I take no affront to the concept of socioeconomic advantage. But individual whites are not necessarily recipients of this kind of advantage. Stereotyping an entire race based on the advantages that 75% of that race has enjoyed is ridiculous.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 05, 2008, 04:20:46 PM
Bearly--that's only one very specific and narrow aspect of white privilege. There are plenty of others that you get, even if you're poor or new to the country. See the checklist earlier in the thread.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 05, 2008, 04:21:38 PM
Stereotyping an entire race based on the advantages that 75% of that race has enjoyed is ridiculous.

Good lord. It's not stereotyping.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: lawandethan on April 05, 2008, 04:33:47 PM
1.  AA in law school is just plain unfair.
2.  Diversity in today's context means race-based screening; it does not mean anything helpful or help anyone trying to learn the law.

Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 05, 2008, 04:35:36 PM
Bearly--that's only one very specific and narrow aspect of white privilege. There are plenty of others that you get, even if you're poor or new to the country. See the checklist earlier in the thread.
I have seen that checklist many times before it was posted here. One of my recommenders is a professor who is a longtime contemporary of the woman who wrote that list. I didn't want to go over them one by one refuting them all because I think it would be a childish endeavor. I am willing to for sake of discussion, but when I raise up points in this discussion, I seem to get nothing but eyerolls and namecalling in response, and so I don't feel like it's worthwhile tackling every individual point on that list when the things I mention are generally disregarded, and not even considered with an open mind. If someone wants to have a real conversation about those points, I will gladly engage them.

Most of the disadvantages listed are faced by almost anyone that doesn't look like a "standard" member of a given social group. Many of the disadvantages described are faced by other social and ethnic groups. Similarly, people who are "too short", or "too tall", or "too skinny", or "too fat", or have a wart on their nose, or are albino, etc. face massive challenges in "mainstream" society. The disadvantages listed are not unique only to black people, and there are plenty of white people who look different, or act different, or speak with a permanent accent, or have "funny" names who also face these kinds of disadvantages.

Again - I agree 100% that "white people" as a macro "racial" group have more advantages than "black people" do in America. But real life doesn't take place on a macro level - assuming that every individual white person has the advantages that the poster I originally took umbrage with asserted we have is simply untrue, and racist.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 05, 2008, 04:36:27 PM
Bearly--that's only one very specific and narrow aspect of white privilege. There are plenty of others that you get, even if you're poor or new to the country. See the checklist earlier in the thread.
I have seen that checklist many times before it was posted here. One of my recommenders is a professor who is a longtime contemporary of the woman who wrote that list. I didn't want to go over them one by one refuting them all because I think it would be a childish endeavor. I am willing to for sake of discussion, but when I raise up points in this discussion, I seem to get nothing but eyerolls and namecalling in response, and so I don't feel like it's worthwhile tackling every individual point on that list when the things I mention are generally disregarded, and not even considered with an open mind. If someone wants to have a real conversation about those points, I will gladly engage them.

Most of the disadvantages listed are faced by almost anyone that doesn't look like a "standard" member of a given social group. Many of the disadvantages described are faced by other social and ethnic groups. Similarly, people who are "too short", or "too tall", or "too skinny", or "too fat", or have a wart on their nose, or are albino, etc. face massive challenges in "mainstream" society. The disadvantages listed are not unique only to black people, and there are plenty of white people who look different, or act different, or speak with a permanent accent, or have "funny" names who also face these kinds of disadvantages.

Again - I agree 100% that "white people" as a macro "racial" group have more advantages than "black people" do in America. But real life doesn't take place on a macro level - assuming that every individual white person has the advantages that the poster I originally took umbrage with asserted we have is simply untrue and racist.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Penn263 on April 05, 2008, 04:57:50 PM
I'm not white...actually I'm of an ethnicity which AA benefits the MOST. Yet, I think AA needs serious revamping. It must emphasize socioeconomic background heavier than ethnic background, among other things.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 05, 2008, 05:12:27 PM


Again - I agree 100% that "white people" as a macro "racial" group have more advantages than "black people" do in America. But real life doesn't take place on a macro level - assuming that every individual white person has the advantages that the poster I originally took umbrage with asserted we have is simply untrue, and racist.

I want to interject that this is where I get really pissed off. "Race" in America has been reduced to black and white - literally.  Even Obama in The Speech couldn't think to mention the issues and concerns of non-AA people of color more than a handful of times (we NDNs got two words.)  There is a whole lot more to "race" in America, and many of these intersect with socio-economics and justice in ways very different from the discussion we seem to always have when affirmative action and race are brought up.  Geez, in another thread the other day, I saw some guy with the username "skinzfan" blather on about "why are 'people' so focused on racism?" - I had no words, no words.  The LA Times published an editorial last week in which a famed scholar on human rights wrote, "...are the Tibetans doomed to go the way of the American Indians? Will they be reduced to being little more than a tourist attraction, peddling cheap mementos of what was once a great culture?"  The uproar?  None.  Now imagine if African or Chinese culture was so described.

That's why "the checklist" works on many levels - while we've gotten to the point in higher education that it's pretty unusual in large universities for AAs to be the only AA in their class, it's absolutely not the case for me.  I can't remember when I ever had another NDN in class, and thus, how I was expected to Teh Spokeswoman for all NDNs.  Indian issues are so far down the totem pole, they're subterranean.  But when you add up the issues of all people of color, (and not just law school URMs,) and compare what thus amounts to almost half of the US population with the "privilege" still held by the melanin-challenged, there's a huge gap (a growing one, for a lot of brown people.)

Not trying to derail this, but just a reminder that stereotyping is a charge that can be tossed around regarding arguments, not just the groups discussed therein.

ETA:  Bearly, earlier you talked about the American "ideal" of assimilation, of your parents' having to give up their culture to fit in - but that's certainly not my ideal.  Nothing personal, but I would prefer if all you immigrants, going back to 1492, would get the @(*&^ back to wherever you came from.  Just go. 
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 05, 2008, 05:49:38 PM


Again - I agree 100% that "white people" as a macro "racial" group have more advantages than "black people" do in America. But real life doesn't take place on a macro level - assuming that every individual white person has the advantages that the poster I originally took umbrage with asserted we have is simply untrue, and racist.

I want to interject that this is where I get really pissed off. "Race" in America has been reduced to black and white - literally.  Even Obama in The Speech couldn't think to mention the issues and concerns of non-AA people of color more than a handful of times (we NDNs got two words.)  There is a whole lot more to "race" in America, and many of these intersect with socio-economics and justice in ways very different from the discussion we seem to always have when affirmative action and race are brought up.  Geez, in another thread the other day, I saw some guy with the username "skinzfan" blather on about "why are 'people' so focused on racism?" - I had no words, no words.  The LA Times published an editorial last week in which a famed scholar on human rights wrote, "...are the Tibetans doomed to go the way of the American Indians? Will they be reduced to being little more than a tourist attraction, peddling cheap mementos of what was once a great culture?"  The uproar?  None.  Now imagine if African or Chinese culture was so described.

That's why "the checklist" works on many levels - while we've gotten to the point in higher education that it's pretty unusual in large universities for AAs to be the only AA in their class, it's absolutely not the case for me.  I can't remember when I ever had another NDN in class, and thus, how I was expected to Teh Spokeswoman for all NDNs.  Indian issues are so far down the totem pole, they're subterranean.  But when you add up the issues of all people of color, (and not just law school URMs,) and compare what thus amounts to almost half of the US population with the "privilege" still held by the melanin-challenged, there's a huge gap (a growing one, for a lot of brown people.)

Not trying to derail this, but just a reminder that stereotyping is a charge that can be tossed around regarding arguments, not just the groups discussed therein.
I agree 100% with all of the above. The popular construction of "race" in America is overly simplistic, and badly undercuts the legitimate positions of other URMs.



Quote
ETA:  Bearly, earlier you talked about the American "ideal" of assimilation, of your parents' having to give up their culture to fit in - but that's certainly not my ideal.  
Just to clarify, I am personally an immigrant. I came to this country specifically because I was a badly mistreated URM in my homeland.

Quote
Nothing personal, but I would prefer if all you immigrants, going back to 1492, would get the @(*&^ back to wherever you came from.  Just go.
I'm not offended at all. Your point is totally legit. This land is by all rights yours, and the crimes that have been committed against your people are irreperable.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 05, 2008, 06:00:05 PM
On a less adversarial and cranky and somewhat related note, I'm reading Mae Ngai's Impossible Subjects: Illegal Aliens and the Making of Modern America for a seminar paper, and it's very interesting. I highly recommend it if you're interested in such issues. She has an excellent discussion about the construction of whiteness, among other things.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 05, 2008, 06:08:28 PM


Again - I agree 100% that "white people" as a macro "racial" group have more advantages than "black people" do in America. But real life doesn't take place on a macro level - assuming that every individual white person has the advantages that the poster I originally took umbrage with asserted we have is simply untrue, and racist.

I want to interject that this is where I get really pissed off. "Race" in America has been reduced to black and white - literally.  Even Obama in The Speech couldn't think to mention the issues and concerns of non-AA people of color more than a handful of times (we NDNs got two words.)  There is a whole lot more to "race" in America, and many of these intersect with socio-economics and justice in ways very different from the discussion we seem to always have when affirmative action and race are brought up.  Geez, in another thread the other day, I saw some guy with the username "skinzfan" blather on about "why are 'people' so focused on racism?" - I had no words, no words.  The LA Times published an editorial last week in which a famed scholar on human rights wrote, "...are the Tibetans doomed to go the way of the American Indians? Will they be reduced to being little more than a tourist attraction, peddling cheap mementos of what was once a great culture?"  The uproar?  None.  Now imagine if African or Chinese culture was so described.

That's why "the checklist" works on many levels - while we've gotten to the point in higher education that it's pretty unusual in large universities for AAs to be the only AA in their class, it's absolutely not the case for me.  I can't remember when I ever had another NDN in class, and thus, how I was expected to Teh Spokeswoman for all NDNs.  Indian issues are so far down the totem pole, they're subterranean.  But when you add up the issues of all people of color, (and not just law school URMs,) and compare what thus amounts to almost half of the US population with the "privilege" still held by the melanin-challenged, there's a huge gap (a growing one, for a lot of brown people.)

Not trying to derail this, but just a reminder that stereotyping is a charge that can be tossed around regarding arguments, not just the groups discussed therein.

ETA:  Bearly, earlier you talked about the American "ideal" of assimilation, of your parents' having to give up their culture to fit in - but that's certainly not my ideal.  Nothing personal, but I would prefer if all you immigrants, going back to 1492, would get the @(*&^ back to wherever you came from.  Just go.

 :o

As an individual who is part Native American, I respectfully disagree.

If you're not a tribal citizen concerned with indigenous sovereignty, I wouldn't expect you would agree, no matter what your distant ancestry might be.  And since I'm not Teh Spokeswoman for all NDNs, I don't expect all culturally affiliated and/or enrolled tribal members to agree with me either.  But I would argue that my view is the majority view in Indian Country today.

ETA: BTW, this doesn't mean that I don't really like many of you - in fact, I'd love it if you visited frequently after resettling someplace else.  ;D
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 05, 2008, 08:14:31 PM
Confidential to Bearly: just as the personal is political, the micro is macro.

To expand on this theme: Nothing can happen on the macro level that doesn't have effects on the micro level, so it's disingenuous to insist that change needs to happen--it just can't happen in any way that ever affects someone that you would call unfair. If you want change to happen, maybe you've got to take your lumps like everyone else does. Or, to say it another way: be the change you wish to see in the world. Or, one more way: we are the people we have been waiting for.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 05, 2008, 08:18:50 PM
I'm not white...actually I'm of an ethnicity which AA benefits the MOST. Yet, I think AA needs serious revamping. It must emphasize socioeconomic background heavier than ethnic background, among other things.

Yes.

This thread reminds me of the episode of South Park where Big Gay Al says he is ok with the fact that the Boy Scouts don't allow gays, and then gets called a homophobe for it.

Just so you know, it's possible to like things that hurt you. Exhibit A: Masochism. Exhibit B: Warren Buffett on the estate tax. Exhibit C: Jewish antisemites. Exhibit D: Log Cabin Republicans. The list goes on.

Yet one more reason law and econ is such a motherfucking pile of bull.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 06, 2008, 04:36:29 AM
Confidential to Bearly: just as the personal is political, the micro is macro.

To expand on this theme: Nothing can happen on the macro level that doesn't have effects on the micro level, so it's disingenuous to insist that change needs to happen--it just can't happen in any way that ever affects someone that you would call unfair. If you want change to happen, maybe you've got to take your lumps like everyone else does. Or, to say it another way: be the change you wish to see in the world. Or, one more way: we are the people we have been waiting for.
Right! Now we are talking. This is exactly why I DO support AA wholeheartedly. The necessity for AA to solve a significant macro problem is obvious, and it's ok if some people need to make minor sacrifices on the micro level to achieve desirable macro effects.

The only contention I had was with a specific post that claimed that every individual white peson starts off on "third base" due to "white privilege". That's just not the case. There are 221,331,000ish "white" people in the US. Due to that volume, 48% of Americans living below the poverty line are white.

While it is true that the wealthiest Americans do happen to be white, the socio-economic disparity between the wealthiest whites and the poorest is also the widest gap. So the contention that "all whites are privileged" is a silly concept that creates significant racial tension between poor minorities and poor whites - when the real common "enemy" is the actually privileged nepotistic and entitled whites at the top of the socio-economic ladder. This tension between the poor of all the various groups in the US has historically been used to propogate racialist and racist thinking, and to benefit the "anglo" dominance in many ways (which I would be willing to discuss, but that's a pretty long digression), while damaging race relations, and undercutting the ability for all disadvantaged groups to raise themselves out of socioeconomic second-class citizenship.

The contention that "white" history is taught in schools is also nonsense - Western-European history is taught in schools. The idea that we are living in a "white" culture stands in stark contrast with the well-established sociological principle that "... culture should be regarded as the set of distinctive spiritual, material, intellectual and emotional features of society or a social group, and that it encompasses, in addition to art and literature, lifestyles, ways of living together, value systems, traditions and beliefs" - an ethnically defined status, not a racially defined one. The millions of Eastern Europeans, Serbs, Bosnians, Greeks, Turks, Persians, Cubans, etc. who live in the US do not benefit from the dominant "white" culture and language the way that that "anglo" whites do.

In short, one can support Affirmative Action and other programs to solve significant national macro problems, without being blind to the micro complexity that exists - and making racist remarks like "all whites have it easy".
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 06, 2008, 08:25:35 AM
I think the point is: when you compare apples to apples (white people of a certain SES with non-white people of the same SES), the white apples have an easier time. Given that, and given that obviously being of a certain race does confer some disadvantages that no one has proven go away with an increase in SES (and in fact, many have submitted evidence to the contrary--that the disadvantages of a being given race can/do persist despite SES, see, e.g., the checklist), I think it's safe to say that there is an advantage to being white. Period. Even if specific whites are occasionally disadvantaged vis a vis other whites, or even a very few, very non-representative minorities. As for the biggest wealth gap in the country, isn't that clear that that's because only white people (roughly speaking) get to the very upper echelons of extreme and obscene wealth? I don't see how that's an argument against the existence of white privilege; if anything, it's an argument against the existence of the much-bemoaned high-SES URM.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: simonsays on April 06, 2008, 09:21:14 AM
I think the point is: when you compare apples to apples (white people of a certain SES with non-white people of the same SES), the white apples have an easier time. Given that, and given that obviously being of a certain race does confer some disadvantages that no one has proven go away with an increase in SES (and in fact, many have submitted evidence to the contrary--that the disadvantages of a being given race can/do persist despite SES, see, e.g., the checklist), I think it's safe to say that there is an advantage to being white. Period. Even if specific whites are occasionally disadvantaged vis a vis other whites, or even a very few, very non-representative minorities. As for the biggest wealth gap in the country, isn't that clear that that's because only white people (roughly speaking) get to the very upper echelons of extreme and obscene wealth? I don't see how that's an argument against the existence of white privilege; if anything, it's an argument against the existence of the much-bemoaned high-SES URM.


Is this true across the board?  I can understand the advantage in lower and middle class SES, but am not so sure the advantage hold at the highest (obscene wealth) SES bracket?  Now you could make the argument that you can't traverse to the highest bracket without breaking the barriers of the lower/middle classes, but I'm skeptical on the apples-to-apples SES comparison at the extreme and obscene wealth range. 






Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 06, 2008, 10:49:02 AM
I think the point is: when you compare apples to apples (white people of a certain SES with non-white people of the same SES), the white apples have an easier time. Given that, and given that obviously being of a certain race does confer some disadvantages that no one has proven go away with an increase in SES (and in fact, many have submitted evidence to the contrary--that the disadvantages of a being given race can/do persist despite SES, see, e.g., the checklist), I think it's safe to say that there is an advantage to being white. Period. Even if specific whites are occasionally disadvantaged vis a vis other whites, or even a very few, very non-representative minorities. As for the biggest wealth gap in the country, isn't that clear that that's because only white people (roughly speaking) get to the very upper echelons of extreme and obscene wealth? I don't see how that's an argument against the existence of white privilege; if anything, it's an argument against the existence of the much-bemoaned high-SES URM.
Good argument. Let's break it down, though:

Quote
I think the point is: when you compare apples to apples (white people of a certain SES with non-white people of the same SES), the white apples have an easier time.
When you compare apples to apples at the lowest echelons of society, many of the problems faced by african-americans living in "white" soceity are not so prevelent because in settings where the poorest African-Americans live, they form the majority culture. In NYC, for example, if you are poor and "white", "asian", "middle-eastern", etc., for example you live in neighborhoods that are predominantly black, go to schools that cater predominantly to black students. You go to barbers who do primarily "black" haircuts, you are exposed to predominantly "black" music and art. Yes, you can turn on the tv and watch shows that portray more white people than black, but you can't relate to the white people on TV on any level because they live in a totally different world than the one you have experienced. It is at this level that white privilege breaks down, and ceases to exist. In the hood, the worst thing to be is white. And there are plenty of white people in the hood that don't have the education or the means to get out.

Quote
Given that, and given that obviously being of a certain race does confer some disadvantages that no one has proven go away with an increase in SES (and in fact, many have submitted evidence to the contrary--that the disadvantages of a being given race can/do persist despite SES, see, e.g., the checklist), I think it's safe to say that there is an advantage to being white. Period.
I agree that by increasing SES and moving out of the ghetto, lighter-skinned people have an easier time acclimating to mainstream society than African Americans. At the same time, at this "transient" social level, lower-middle class whites, asians, middle easterners, etc. face unique challenges that black people do not. They have no money with which to attain a higher education that is key for escaping poverty, and no significant institutional organizations to help them escape. Black people at least have access to organizations such as the United Negro College Fund and dozens of other financial aid opportunities that are designated as "black-only". This "upwardly mobile" SES level is also where AA is the most beneficial to African Americans, but is most damaging to prospective non-black applicants, who don't have access to the educational, financial, legacy and other resources that white candidates are presumed to have over black americans.

It is easier to blend into mainstream society as an upwardly mobile white person, but I would argue that due to the lack of institutional support, actually becoming an upwardly mobile white person is far more challenging.

Again - this isn't a call to abolish AA or other programs that help black college students - those programs MUST exist because due a history of institutional racism. The fact is that the vast majority of African Americans are at this social level, but only a relative minority of  whites - therefore our society has a pretty significant macro problem. But completely discounting the unique challenges faced by whites at this level is dishonest, and it actually detracts from the dialogue on race in America.

Quote
Even if specific whites are occasionally disadvantaged vis a vis other whites, or even a very few, very non-representative minorities.
When "specific whites" refers to 48% of the people living below poverty level in the US, you are dealing with many millions of disadvantaged people - these individuals comprise a huge subset of our society, and they are almost always overlooked in debates on relative advantage. I don't think that's an honest way to think about our country, and more importantly, I don't think that it's an honest way to shape public policy.

Further, they are not disadvantaged only vis-a-vis other whites, or very few non-representative minorities. The latest demographic data clearly shows that "white" people are actually second to "Asian" people in the US in both education and income. In fact, broken down by household family income, "Asians" have a 10k/year median gap with white people - an amount that's as large as the gap between white people and hispanic people. If you control for high income, self-segregating social groups such as old-blood anglo-saxons and Ashkenazi Jews - median income for whites in the US plummets, and becomes similar to hispanic median income.

Therein lies my biggest problem with this whole debate - by using racial designations to define comparative advantage, people throw all whites together into a round number without realizing that a serbian refugee will never in his lifetime have anything in common with an old-blood anglo saxon in the US. The obscene wealth at the top of the socioeconomic ladder completely skews the perceptions of what it means to be "white" in America.

Quote
As for the biggest wealth gap in the country, isn't that clear that that's because only white people (roughly speaking) get to the very upper echelons of extreme and obscene wealth? I don't see how that's an argument against the existence of white privilege; if anything, it's an argument against the existence of the much-bemoaned high-SES URM.

I would disagree. While it's true that the vast majority of multi-millionaires in this country are "white", they tend to be, as I mentioned before, old-blood anglo-saxons and Ashkenazi jews. How much help is that, really, to a serbian refugee living in Bed-Stuy?

Again, by throwing 75% of the people in this country together, and calling them all "white", we are making a large identification error. If, for example, we threw all non-white people together, and compared people of "European Descent" with people of "Non-European Descent" in the US, the comparative income would appear very similar, because the relatively high-SES Ashkenazi Jews and Asian Americans would skew the numbers on the "Non-European Descent" side. Would such a definition of "race" accurately depict the struggle of relatively lower-SES African Americans, Hispanics and Native Americans? Of course not! By having such a broad defenition of "whiteness", scholars often over-emphasize the existence of "white privilege" in how it relates to "minority whites".

As for the "much-bemoaned" high-SES URM? Good! It's about damn time that some URMs got to be high-SES!
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: simonsays on April 06, 2008, 11:00:46 AM
I think the point is: when you compare apples to apples (white people of a certain SES with non-white people of the same SES), the white apples have an easier time. Given that, and given that obviously being of a certain race does confer some disadvantages that no one has proven go away with an increase in SES (and in fact, many have submitted evidence to the contrary--that the disadvantages of a being given race can/do persist despite SES, see, e.g., the checklist), I think it's safe to say that there is an advantage to being white. Period. Even if specific whites are occasionally disadvantaged vis a vis other whites, or even a very few, very non-representative minorities. As for the biggest wealth gap in the country, isn't that clear that that's because only white people (roughly speaking) get to the very upper echelons of extreme and obscene wealth? I don't see how that's an argument against the existence of white privilege; if anything, it's an argument against the existence of the much-bemoaned high-SES URM.


Is this true across the board?  I can understand the advantage in lower and middle class SES, but am not so sure the advantage hold at the highest (obscene wealth) SES bracket?  Now you could make the argument that you can't traverse to the highest bracket without breaking the barriers of the lower/middle classes, but I'm skeptical on the apples-to-apples SES comparison at the extreme and obscene wealth range. 


Its even worse at higher incomes. This happened to me Saturday. I am at the car wash getting my car detailed for spring. So Iím at the window watching the cars come through. There is a mid 30ís white guy to my left and a late 20ís early 30's black guy to my right. The place is pretty dead other than us because itís right when they opened. The white guys has typical polo type shirt and Dockers and a newspaper under his arm. Black guy has baggy pants, t-shirt and baseball cap, not gangster but, but not dressy. So in comes a brand-new 2008 Bentley Continental GT Speed with temporary tags. That s a $200k car. It goes through; I want to find out who owns it because I want to ask the guy about because Iím a car nut. I start to turn to the white guy to ask if thatís his car when he walks towards the waiting area. So I think, hmm maybe itís the black guys car.

[bandwidth recycling]

That is white privilege even at the insanely wealthy range. I donít care if youíre the most race blind person in the world, we have all seen more rich white people than rich black people, we are going to assume FIRST the expensive car belongs to the white man. Because in movies and TV and in everyday life we see white people driving expensive cars, when we see a black guy in a Ferrari its an athlete or rap star on MTV cribs.

We assume and place things on people based on our sociological perceptions and stereotypes of those people and what they can achieve, we assume things and white folks get the benefit of the doubt more than black folks. Thatís white privilege. What would I have thought if I saw that car at 2AM parked in front of my house and that same black guy was reaching into the open window or that same white guy was reaching into the open window? What would your first assumption be? Who would get the benifit of the doubt that they owned the car?


You may have missed my point, but may have also reinforced it.  The basic point is this black man, (hypothetically) assuming he is at the highest SES, has a Bentley, regardless of your lower-SES cultural preconditions.  Once you saw it was his Bentley, you quickly realized and corrected your stereotype.  In short order, it illustrates the point quite simply that money talks, and when you have it, negative cultural perceptions are greatly diminished.  Even if these negative perceptions exist, any actual damage (in your hypo) is minimal.

So for those in lower and middle SES, words = (sticks U stones).  Those in the most upper SES, words=words.

Anyway, I apologize for nitpicking on the upper-SES (which I saw as a conflation with the lower-middle SES comparison) in light of it having little if any practical bearing on the AA/SES debate in general.


Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 06, 2008, 11:09:42 AM
I think the point is: when you compare apples to apples (white people of a certain SES with non-white people of the same SES), the white apples have an easier time. Given that, and given that obviously being of a certain race does confer some disadvantages that no one has proven go away with an increase in SES (and in fact, many have submitted evidence to the contrary--that the disadvantages of a being given race can/do persist despite SES, see, e.g., the checklist), I think it's safe to say that there is an advantage to being white. Period. Even if specific whites are occasionally disadvantaged vis a vis other whites, or even a very few, very non-representative minorities. As for the biggest wealth gap in the country, isn't that clear that that's because only white people (roughly speaking) get to the very upper echelons of extreme and obscene wealth? I don't see how that's an argument against the existence of white privilege; if anything, it's an argument against the existence of the much-bemoaned high-SES URM.


Is this true across the board?  I can understand the advantage in lower and middle class SES, but am not so sure the advantage hold at the highest (obscene wealth) SES bracket?  Now you could make the argument that you can't traverse to the highest bracket without breaking the barriers of the lower/middle classes, but I'm skeptical on the apples-to-apples SES comparison at the extreme and obscene wealth range. 


Its even worse at higher incomes. This happened to me Saturday. I am at the car wash getting my car detailed for spring. So Iím at the window watching the cars come through. There is a mid 30ís white guy to my left and a late 20ís early 30's black guy to my right. The place is pretty dead other than us because itís right when they opened. The white guys has typical polo type shirt and Dockers and a newspaper under his arm. Black guy has baggy pants, t-shirt and baseball cap, not gangster but, but not dressy. So in comes a brand-new 2008 Bentley Continental GT Speed with temporary tags. That s a $200k car. It goes through; I want to find out who owns it because I want to ask the guy about because Iím a car nut. I start to turn to the white guy to ask if thatís his car when he walks towards the waiting area. So I think, hmm maybe itís the black guys car.

So I go through the possibilities, maybe this guys a pro athlete, maybe heís a rap star, maybe heís a lot attendant getting the car washed for someone to pick up. Anyway, by now my cars outside so I go out front. The white guy goes up to the Bentley starts inspecting it as if he is looking for dirt they are missing while wiping it off. So I start to think wonder if this guy is a partner at a big firm, or maybe a heart surgeon or CEO of some company, or maybe a pro golfer. Just then, the car wash guy waves his hand and the white guy heads over and gets into his 2000 silver Accord. A few minutes later, the black guy comes out and gets in the Bentley. I still have no idea what either of them do for a living, but I assumed what they did based on little more than what they looked like.

Like it or not we would all likely go through the same assumptions and stereotypes I did in trying to place strangers with their cars. I would have had to go WAY down the list of possible jobs that allowed the black buy to buy that car before I got to doctor or lawyer, but the white guy based on his dress and his skin color I automatically thought he was some rich professional.

That is white privilege even at the insanely wealthy range. I donít care if youíre the most race blind person in the world, we have all seen more rich white people than rich black people, we are going to assume FIRST the expensive car belongs to the white man. Because in movies and TV and in everyday life we see white people driving expensive cars, when we see a black guy in a Ferrari its an athlete or rap star on MTV cribs.

We assume and place things on people based on our sociological perceptions and stereotypes of those people and what they can achieve, we assume things and white folks get the benefit of the doubt more than black folks. Thatís white privilege. What would I have thought if I saw that car at 2AM parked in front of my house and that same black guy was reaching into the open window or that same white guy was reaching into the open window? What would your first assumption be? Who would get the benifit of the doubt that they owned the car?

Another good point, Matthies - but a couple of questions:

If the AA guy was wearing a crisp polo shirt and some golf pants, and the white guy was wearing some baggy BOSS jeans (or, to keep it maybe culturally consistent some black eye-liner and emo-wear), do you think you would have still made the same assumptions?

If the black guy was wearing some medical scrubs?

If the black guy was wearing a smoking jacket and some courdoroys?

If the white guy had on a really bad hawaiian shirt and had a terrible haircut and a 15-day shave?

If the white guy sounded like this? http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3959810249369161691&q=borat&total=23090&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

(The point is that the assumptions you made were based on cultural, not racial indicators.)

Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 06, 2008, 02:40:43 PM
In this context, that's vague jibber-jabber.

If you saw one of these guys in the car shop, you would think they were well educated professionals:

(http://polo.imageg.net/graphics/product_images/pPOLO2-2401119_standard_v330.jpg)

(http://polo.imageg.net/graphics/product_images/pPOLO2-3660576_mailer_v330.jpg)


However, if you saw one of the following people, you would think something else, even though they are white:

(http://www.thephoenix.com/OnTheDownload/content/binary/Sullee.jpg)

(http://www.karmaloop.com/vendor/BUR/BRTDOWN-KRYPmd.jpg)



To say that you misjudged the guy simply for being black is untrue. You misjudged the guy because he was black, and wasn't dressed the way a stereotypical professional dresses.

If I saw Barak Obama surrounded by 15 black professionals dressed in suits, I wouldn't step across the street (I'd probably want an autograph or want to take a picture with him.) But if I saw 16 white bikers in hells angels gear, I very well might. Am I racist against whites? In the context of my hypo, is Barak Obama the recipient of some vague notion of "black privilege"?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 06, 2008, 02:57:57 PM
In this context, that's vague jibber-jabber.

If you saw one of these guys in the car shop, you would think they were well educated professionals:

(http://polo.imageg.net/graphics/product_images/pPOLO2-2401119_standard_v330.jpg)

(http://polo.imageg.net/graphics/product_images/pPOLO2-3660576_mailer_v330.jpg)


However, if you saw one of the following people, you would think something else, even though they are white:

(http://www.thephoenix.com/OnTheDownload/content/binary/Sullee.jpg)

(http://www.karmaloop.com/vendor/BUR/BRTDOWN-KRYPmd.jpg)



To say that you misjudged the guy simply for being black is untrue. You misjudged the guy because he was black, and wasn't dressed the way a stereotypical professional dresses.

If I saw Barak Obama surrounded by 15 black professionals dressed in suits, I wouldn't step across the street (I'd probably want an autograph or want to take a picture with him.) But if I saw 16 white bikers in hells angels gear, I very well might. Am I racist against whites? In the context of my hypo, is Barak Obama the recipient of some vague notion of "black privilege"?


I haven't said much in this debate because, as BL refines his argument, it gets closer to the middle ground that I think exists in the dichotomies at issue.  I still think he's ignoring some important points, which is particularly strange because it would not be much of a concession just to grant them (and they are true).

Here's one.  With this poser, you're showing that you're still not comparing apples with apples in an SES context.  The REAL analogy is this:


You see a white guy in nice clothes.  You see a black guy in the exact same nice clothes.  There's a Bentley and a Ford Taurus with shining chrome 22s parked side by side.  Which car belongs to whom?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: MahlerGrooves on April 06, 2008, 03:03:22 PM
You see a white guy in nice clothes.  You see a black guy in the exact same nice clothes.  There's a Bentley and a Ford Taurus with shining chrome 22s parked side by side.  Which car belongs to whom?

The Bentley clearly belongs to the Black guy for two reasons:  1 - A white guy would have a BMW 7 series like all the fathers of my friends in HS (they ALL had BMWs.  It was likea cult).  2 - A black guy would NOT drive a Taurus.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 06, 2008, 03:09:16 PM
You see a white guy in nice clothes.  You see a black guy in the exact same nice clothes.  There's a Bentley and a Ford Taurus with shining chrome 22s parked side by side.  Which car belongs to whom?

The Bentley clearly belongs to the Black guy for two reasons:  1 - A white guy would have a BMW 7 series like all the fathers of my friends in HS (they ALL had BMWs.  It was likea cult).  2 - A black guy would NOT drive a Taurus.

 :D
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 06, 2008, 03:17:34 PM
Quote
I haven't said much in this debate because, as BL refines his argument, it gets closer to the middle ground that I think exists in the dichotomies at issue.  I still think he's ignoring some important points, which is particularly strange because it would not be much of a concession just to grant them (and they are true).
Please bring them up! I'm not running around trying to spout off some kind of right-wing ideology. Like I said, I do believe there is a race-based macro problem in the US. I don't deny that we have a ways to go. All I am saying is that sociology is a complex field, and saying that "all whites start off on third base" is untrue and offensive to the millions of whites who start off with (and end up with) nothing but poverty, and no real institutional means to overcome it.

Quote
Here's one.  With this poser, you're showing that you're still not comparing apples with apples in an SES context.  The REAL analogy is this:
I'm not comparing apples with apples because Matthies' post that I was addressing wasn't comparing apples with apples. He had one guy in a polo shirt and khakies and was comparing him to a guy with baggy jeans, and asking who owned the nicest car. That's not a racial question - that's a sociocultural one.


Quote
You see a white guy in nice clothes.  You see a black guy in the exact same nice clothes.  There's a Bentley and a Ford Taurus with shining chrome 22s parked side by side.  Which car belongs to whom?
This is actually a very good question. The answer is - I don't make assumptions about this because I am surrounded by wealthy black individuals. My boss is black. But I will concede that my attitudes may well be atypical in society in general, and that's a huge problem. This is also why I do support AA - I believe that macro-level public perception does not promote the appearence of african-americans as professionals.

But this kind of "advantage" to whites doesn't exist in the classes of whites who are living in poverty, and have no opportunity to raise themselves to the professional level.

I understand that my point isn't a simple one to digest - but racial questions are complex. Simply saying that everyone who is white "starts on third base" ignores the reality that plenty of whites don't even own cars - or nice clothes, and never have the privilege to be compared in this way in the first place.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 06, 2008, 03:26:06 PM
Bearly: do you seriously not see that the clothing you're describing is so culturally/racially identified that that's really what you're seeing? The clothing is not free of associations. Why do you think "baggy pants and a baseball cap" are seen as unprofessional? Do you think it's unrelated to the fact that it's a uniform typically worn by black people? Why are bermuda shorts with little lobsters all over them more associated with professionalism and/or wealth than are basketball shorts? Do you think it's unrelated to the fact that white people wear them?

This is like your naming argument from a few pages back. You said people of color should name their kids "mainstream" names if they want them to succeed. Why isn't Wendzell a mainstream name? Why can't it be? Is there anything inherent in the name Wendzell that makes it unprofessional? Or is it that it's associated with African-Americans?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 06, 2008, 03:27:48 PM
Quote
I haven't said much in this debate because, as BL refines his argument, it gets closer to the middle ground that I think exists in the dichotomies at issue.  I still think he's ignoring some important points, which is particularly strange because it would not be much of a concession just to grant them (and they are true).
Please bring them up! I'm not running around trying to spout off some kind of right-wing ideology. Like I said, I do believe there is a race-based macro problem in the US. I don't deny that we have a ways to go. All I am saying is that sociology is a complex field, and saying that "all whites start off on third base" is untrue and offensive to the millions of whites who start off with (and end up with) nothing but poverty, and no real institutional means to overcome it.

Quote
Here's one.  With this poser, you're showing that you're still not comparing apples with apples in an SES context.  The REAL analogy is this:
I'm not comparing apples with apples because Matthies' post that I was addressing wasn't comparing apples with apples. He had one guy in a polo shirt and khakies and was comparing him to a guy with baggy jeans, and asking who owned the nicest car. That's not a racial question - that's a sociocultural one.


Quote
You see a white guy in nice clothes.  You see a black guy in the exact same nice clothes.  There's a Bentley and a Ford Taurus with shining chrome 22s parked side by side.  Which car belongs to whom?
This is actually a very good question. The answer is - I don't make assumptions about this because I am surrounded by wealthy black individuals. My boss is black. But I will concede that my attitudes may well be atypical in society in general, and that's a huge problem. This is also why I do support AA - I believe that macro-level public perception does not promote the appearence of african-americans as professionals.

But this kind of "advantage" to whites doesn't exist in the classes of whites who are living in poverty, and have no opportunity to raise themselves to the professional level.

I understand that my point isn't a simple one to digest - but racial questions are complex. Simply saying that everyone who is white "starts on third base" ignores the reality that plenty of whites don't even own cars - or nice clothes, and never have the privilege to be compared in this way in the first place.


I don't think you're going to meet anyone who has greater knowledge of exactly just how complex racial questions are anytime soon.  I've been there on both sides of the fence in a number of extraordinary contexts, so I fully understand what you're trying to get at.  If I wasn't so lazy, I'd point out where the two sides overlap here and why you should just let a few things go that you're nitpicking on, because your overall argument is fairly solid.

But I am so lazy.   :D
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 06, 2008, 03:43:36 PM
Quote
Bearly: do you seriously not see that the clothing you're describing is so culturally/racially identified that that's really what you're seeing?
It *is* culturally identified, but it is not racially identified. Come to the hood and see how white kids dress. Come to the suburbs and see how black folks dress.(Obviously there are less white folks in the hood, and less black folks in the suburbs - but denying that these people exist is disingenuous.)

Quote
The clothing is not free of associations. Why do you think "baggy pants and a baseball cap" are seen as unprofessional?
Because this is clothing that has traditionally been associated with unprofessionalism. If you dress like a thug, don't go calling racism if someone assumes you are a thug. This isn't a black/white thing. This is a professional/unproffessional thing.

Quote
Do you think it's unrelated to the fact that it's a uniform typically worn by black people?
Really?! Traditionally successful, even progressive black nationalists, dress in baggy jeans? Was Malcolm X a shill for the white community?

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cb/Malcolm_X_NYWTS_2a.jpg/225px-Malcolm_X_NYWTS_2a.jpg)

Is MLK Jr. betraying his black heritage by dressing like this? Did he rock the FUBU?

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/84/Martin_Luther_King_Jr_NYWTS.jpg/250px-Martin_Luther_King_Jr_NYWTS.jpg)

Sure, some of these styles originated in anglo society, but this is just how successful people dress. Successful black people and successful white people.

If white people are seen as unprofessional in an adidas tracksuit, why should black people be seen professional in a fubu hoody and boss jeans?


Quote
Why are bermuda shorts with little lobsters all over them more associated with professionalism and/or wealth than are basketball shorts?
Hahahaha! OMG this cracked me up.  :D :D :D

WHAT!?!?!? Little lobsters?!


Quote
This is like your naming argument from a few pages back. You said people of color should name their kids "mainstream" names if they want them to succeed. Why isn't Wendzell a mainstream name? Why can't it be? Is there anything inherent in the name Wendzell that makes it unprofessional? Or is it that it's associated with African-Americans?
I agree that the naming conventions in the US cause significant professional discrimination - but is a white serbian named Mohammed or a polish guy named Wolenskis Pershimoff any better off than Wendzell? Why do you claim that this is a racial thing when it's clear that many people who are *not* black face the same problems?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 06, 2008, 04:05:24 PM
Sure, some of these styles originated in anglo society, but this is just how successful people dress.

You are just desperately not getting it, aren't you? "Just how" implies ex nihilo--that our understanding of a necktie  as "professional" is inherent to wrapping a pointy-ended piece of fabric around your neck. I'm challenging that. You're responding by saying it again. Do better, or step off.

And don't even start with me about Malcolm X and MLK. You know full well that clothing styles were different for all Americans in the 60s than they are now. Talk about disingenuous.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 06, 2008, 04:10:35 PM
Quote
You are just desperately not getting it, aren't you?
I feel like this has become a mutual malady at this point. No reason to keep playing this silly game of ping-pong.

No, you are right - Basketball shorts aren't standard board-room apparel because of racism, not cultural and class expectations. How could I have been so dense?

Modern black leaders:

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/63/ObamaBarack.jpg/160px-ObamaBarack.jpg)

(http://americanradioworks.publicradio.org/features/sayitplain/images/jjackson.jpg)

(http://www.freepioneer.com/uploaded_images/SharptonAl-701692.jpg)

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/41/Farrakhan.jpg/200px-Farrakhan.jpg)

Check out all that ROCA Wear!
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 06, 2008, 04:26:29 PM
Quote
You are just desperately not getting it, aren't you?
I feel like this has become a mutual malady at this point. No reason to keep playing this silly game of ping-pong.

No, you are right - Basketball shorts aren't standard board-room apparel because of racism, not cultural and class expectations. How could I have been so dense?



Quite honestly, dude, you really are not getting it.  She's logically in the right here.  She got your argument, addressed it at its merits, and then countered the basic assumptions underlying it.  Your response has been to repeat the argument that she's already laid bare.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 06, 2008, 04:28:12 PM
Quote
You are just desperately not getting it, aren't you?
I feel like this has become a mutual malady at this point. No reason to keep playing this silly game of ping-pong.

No, you are right - Basketball shorts aren't standard board-room apparel because of racism, not cultural and class expectations. How could I have been so dense?



Quite honestly, dude, you really are not getting it.  She's logically in the right here.  She got your argument, addressed it at its merits, and then countered the basic assumptions underlying it.  Your response has been to repeat the argument that she's already laid bare.

Because you say so? Point to where she did this, and I'll ackgnowledge it.

Thus far, I keep hearing more and more statements that wrongfully conflate class, culture and race, and further assertions based on that badly skewed misunderstanding.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 06, 2008, 06:42:27 PM
Quote
You are just desperately not getting it, aren't you?
I feel like this has become a mutual malady at this point. No reason to keep playing this silly game of ping-pong.

No, you are right - Basketball shorts aren't standard board-room apparel because of racism, not cultural and class expectations. How could I have been so dense?



Quite honestly, dude, you really are not getting it.  She's logically in the right here.  She got your argument, addressed it at its merits, and then countered the basic assumptions underlying it.  Your response has been to repeat the argument that she's already laid bare.

Because you say so? Point to where she did this, and I'll ackgnowledge it.

Thus far, I keep hearing more and more statements that wrongfully conflate class, culture and race, and further assertions based on that badly skewed misunderstanding.

Two quick points:

1.  I just did point to it.  She tried to partly summarize it in her previous post, too.  What do you say to our points? 

2.  Class, culture and race are necessarily conflated.  I agree that they can be partly separated, and some do it better than others, but I think you sometimes jump to this conclusion improperly in this thread.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: NYU2011 on April 06, 2008, 06:57:25 PM
Its even worse at higher incomes. This happened to me Saturday. I am at the car wash getting my car detailed for spring. So Iím at the window watching the cars come through. There is a mid 30ís white guy to my left and a late 20ís early 30's black guy to my right. The place is pretty dead other than us because itís right when they opened. The white guys has typical polo type shirt and Dockers and a newspaper under his arm. Black guy has baggy pants, t-shirt and baseball cap, not gangster but, but not dressy. So in comes a brand-new 2008 Bentley Continental GT Speed with temporary tags. That s a $200k car. It goes through; I want to find out who owns it because I want to ask the guy about because Iím a car nut. I start to turn to the white guy to ask if thatís his car when he walks towards the waiting area. So I think, hmm maybe itís the black guys car.

So I go through the possibilities, maybe this guys a pro athlete, maybe heís a rap star, maybe heís a lot attendant getting the car washed for someone to pick up. Anyway, by now my cars outside so I go out front. The white guy goes up to the Bentley starts inspecting it as if he is looking for dirt they are missing while wiping it off. So I start to think wonder if this guy is a partner at a big firm, or maybe a heart surgeon or CEO of some company, or maybe a pro golfer. Just then, the car wash guy waves his hand and the white guy heads over and gets into his 2000 silver Accord. A few minutes later, the black guy comes out and gets in the Bentley. I still have no idea what either of them do for a living, but I assumed what they did based on little more than what they looked like.

Like it or not we would all likely go through the same assumptions and stereotypes I did in trying to place strangers with their cars. I would have had to go WAY down the list of possible jobs that allowed the black buy to buy that car before I got to doctor or lawyer, but the white guy based on his dress and his skin color I automatically thought he was some rich professional.

That is white privilege even at the insanely wealthy range. I donít care if youíre the most race blind person in the world, we have all seen more rich white people than rich black people, we are going to assume FIRST the expensive car belongs to the white man. Because in movies and TV and in everyday life we see white people driving expensive cars, when we see a black guy in a Ferrari its an athlete or rap star on MTV cribs.

We assume and place things on people based on our sociological perceptions and stereotypes of those people and what they can achieve, we assume things and white folks get the benefit of the doubt more than black folks. Thatís white privilege. What would I have thought if I saw that car at 2AM parked in front of my house and that same black guy was reaching into the open window or that same white guy was reaching into the open window? What would your first assumption be? Who would get the benifit of the doubt that they owned the car?
[/quote]


I do not believe your perception had much to do with skin color, it was much more based on dress.  If it was the white guy in baggy close and whatnot and the black guy all dressed up with the newspaper you probably (at least I and most others) would assume that it was the black guys car.  This shows that it isn't about your race but how you carry yourself, which many times goes along with socioeconomic status.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: NYU2011 on April 06, 2008, 07:08:59 PM
Sure, some of these styles originated in anglo society, but this is just how successful people dress.

You are just desperately not getting it, aren't you? "Just how" implies ex nihilo--that our understanding of a necktie  as "professional" is inherent to wrapping a pointy-ended piece of fabric around your neck. I'm challenging that. You're responding by saying it again. Do better, or step off.

And don't even start with me about Malcolm X and MLK. You know full well that clothing styles were different for all Americans in the 60s than they are now. Talk about disingenuous.


Hey Dash, as you say clothing styles were different in the 60's.  Dressed up clothes was much more the norm and carried a good connotation.  Dressed in baggy/unprofessional clothes carried a bad connotation.  Nowadays dressing in nice clothes carries a good connotation while dressing in unprofessional clothes carries a bad connotation.  Saying this has anything to do with black/white is plain ridiculous.  If you see someone dressed up in full cowboy attire do you think "wow this person is professional"?  Yet this is clothes you were much more likely to see a white wear than a black wear. 

It has nothing to do with what color of skin the person that wore it has, it has to do with how clean cut the attire looks. 
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: NYU2011 on April 06, 2008, 07:10:04 PM
Quote
You are just desperately not getting it, aren't you?
I feel like this has become a mutual malady at this point. No reason to keep playing this silly game of ping-pong.

No, you are right - Basketball shorts aren't standard board-room apparel because of racism, not cultural and class expectations. How could I have been so dense?



Quite honestly, dude, you really are not getting it.  She's logically in the right here.  She got your argument, addressed it at its merits, and then countered the basic assumptions underlying it.  Your response has been to repeat the argument that she's already laid bare.


The only people that agree with her are the ones who already did.  An unbiased observer more than likely can clearly see she is wrong.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 06, 2008, 07:30:21 PM
1.  I just did point to it.  She tried to partly summarize it in her previous post, too.  What do you say to our points?
Very well, I will slow it down a little bit:

Quote
Just how" implies ex nihilo--that our understanding of a necktie  as "professional" is inherent to wrapping a pointy-ended piece of fabric around your neck.
This mode of dress, though it originates among anglo society, is accepted internationally by cultures that have nothing in common with the American culture as a symbol of status and class. Chinese businessmen dress like this. Russian businessmen dress like this. Indian businessmen dress like this. African buisinessmen dress like this. It is no longer native to the anglo culture. Assuming that the idea of having to dress in a mode that is considered professional around the world, regardless of culture, is somehow racist or prejudiciously advantages white people is silly. Even black american leaders (as pictured above) accept this mode of dress as "professional", not as "white".

Further, the idea that baggy jeans are somehow the "black uniform", and is therefore looked down upon for racist reasons is complete nonsense. Baggy jeans became a style statement of the lower class going back to the Gold Rush in the mid-1800's. White roughnecks who wore their dungarees everywhere were always seen as "lower-class" and "unprofessional". This perception has continued into the modern day. Similarly, ill-fitting clothes (a/k/a baggy) are seen as unprofessional around the world, *including* in the professional african american community.

Placing an undue racial emphasis on an issue that has always existed in "professional" dress regardless of race doesn't somehow make dashrashi's point right.


 

Quote
2.  Class, culture and race are necessarily conflated.  I agree that they can be partly separated, and some do it better than others, but I think you sometimes jump to this conclusion improperly in this thread.
They are at the macro level, but at the individual or micro level, they are not. I say again and again that I agree with AA and other programs that help Black Americans as a macro social group specifically because I understand how these factors correlate.

But at the micro level, culture, class, and race can be and often are entirely seperate issues. A white boy who grew up as an orphan and is spending his entire life in the prison system has far, far more in common with underprivileged blacks culturally and in terms of class than he does other "white" people. The continued willful disregard of this very basic fact makes this entire discussion moot.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 06, 2008, 07:55:08 PM
I'm out. You're being obtuse for what are clearly self-reassuring reasons. You want me to tell you that you had it hard? Fine, you had it hard. Clearly, there's no such thing as white privilege because some number of white people have it hard. Couldn't possibly be. Whatever was I thinking. And clearly the ways in which they have it hard aren't stemming from a system modeled after institutions that have historically oppressed primarily people of color for racist reasons. Clearly they're completely unrelated. Clearly class and race can be neatly separated at all times. Clearly you can't draw out and analyze common associations between certain qualities and different races that many people (including the powerful) have and use to maintain traditional power structures. CLEARLY.

Jesus H. 
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 06, 2008, 07:56:32 PM
The only people that agree with her are the ones who already did.  An unbiased observer more than likely can clearly see she is wrong.
Haha, maybe we should ask him!  ;D
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 06, 2008, 07:57:21 PM
I'm out. You're being obtuse for what are clearly self-reassuring reasons. You want me to tell you that you had it hard? Fine, you had it hard. Clearly, there's no such thing as white privilege because some number of white people have it hard. Couldn't possibly be. Whatever was I thinking. And clearly the ways in which they have it hard aren't stemming from a system modeled after institutions that have historically oppressed primarily people of color for racist reasons. Clearly they're completely unrelated. Clearly class and race can be neatly separated at all times. Clearly you can't draw out and analyze common associations between certain qualities and different races that many people (including the powerful) have and use to maintain traditional power structures. CLEARLY.

Jesus H. 
LOL. I haven't said any of this, but ok. Cya!
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: NYU2011 on April 06, 2008, 08:32:28 PM
you are right, I am wrong in that instance....but if said person was wearing the same in the North East it would not be considered professional.  It is considered professional in some parts of the south because that is what has primarily been worn there in the past as well.  My point is that it is not because it is "white people" clothing that it is considered professional

Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: naturallybeyoutiful on April 06, 2008, 08:36:20 PM
Modern black leaders:

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/63/ObamaBarack.jpg/160px-ObamaBarack.jpg)

(http://americanradioworks.publicradio.org/features/sayitplain/images/jjackson.jpg)

(http://www.freepioneer.com/uploaded_images/SharptonAl-701692.jpg)

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/41/Farrakhan.jpg/200px-Farrakhan.jpg)


 ::) Not to be confused with modern leaders of blacks.  JSIA!
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 06, 2008, 08:36:45 PM
I am urging people to unpack stuff a little beyond "it's professional because it's professional." Why is that outfit, precisely that, considered "professional"? Was it anything else before it was "professional"? Was it only or primarily worn by certain groups? Which groups?

Etc. Come on, y'all. A little analysis is not that difficult.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: naturallybeyoutiful on April 06, 2008, 08:37:28 PM
I am urging people to unpack stuff a little beyond "it's professional because it's professional." Why is that outfit, precisely that, considered "professional"? Was it anything else before it was "professional"? Was it only or primarily worn by certain groups? Which groups?

Etc. Come on, y'all. A little analysis is not that difficult.

ITA!
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 06, 2008, 08:38:02 PM
SMH @ "everyone else wears this business stuff too" W/O questioning discourse in which idea of "professionalism" arose and what dominating force propagated it
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 06, 2008, 08:39:18 PM
I am urging people to unpack stuff a little beyond "it's professional because it's professional." Why is that outfit, precisely that, considered "professional"? Was it anything else before it was "professional"? Was it only or primarily worn by certain groups? Which groups?

Etc. Come on, y'all. A little analysis is not that difficult.

ITA!

It's because we're smart. Duh. !

SMH @ "everyone else wears this business stuff too" W/O questioning discourse in which idea of "professionalism" arose and what dominating force propagated it


Theeeeere we go. I was having trouble getting it out. "Omigod, Obama wears a suit! So it's totally not worth thinking about!"
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: t... on April 06, 2008, 08:51:33 PM
I believe I had this same argument (roughly) about standards of professionalism in SFLSD.

Also, lulz x 10 @ this:


This mode of dress, though it originates among anglo society, is accepted internationally by cultures that have nothing in common with the American culture as a symbol of status and class. Chinese businessmen dress like this. Russian businessmen dress like this. Indian businessmen dress like this. African buisinessmen dress like this. It is no longer native to the anglo culture. Assuming that the idea of having to dress in a mode that is considered professional around the world, regardless of culture, is somehow racist or prejudiciously advantages white people is silly. Even black american leaders (as pictured above) accept this mode of dress as "professional", not as "white".


Ask yourself why this dress is now the professional standard, and why other cultures are adopting it.

Hint: there is nothing inherent about a suit and tie that makes it more "professional" (or even functional) than any other mode of dress.

Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: NYU2011 on April 06, 2008, 08:53:43 PM
You simply sound ridiculous.  So you believe that if White people wore baggy pants in the past then it would be professional now? ::) As you mentioned earlier many many people wore suits in the past.  Why don't you take a step back and look at it, are you telling me a person in a suit does not look better and better able to handle things than someone in baggy pants?  It has nothing to do with the color of the skin of the people before.  It isn't like the President of Africa wears around baggy pants all the time either.  It just doesn't look very clean cut.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: t... on April 06, 2008, 08:53:47 PM
I believe I had this same argument (roughly) about standards of professionalism in SFLSD.

Also, lulz x 10 @ this:


This mode of dress, though it originates among anglo society, is accepted internationally by cultures that have nothing in common with the American culture as a symbol of status and class. Chinese businessmen dress like this. Russian businessmen dress like this. Indian businessmen dress like this. African buisinessmen dress like this. It is no longer native to the anglo culture. Assuming that the idea of having to dress in a mode that is considered professional around the world, regardless of culture, is somehow racist or prejudiciously advantages white people is silly. Even black american leaders (as pictured above) accept this mode of dress as "professional", not as "white".


Ask yourself why this dress is now the professional standard, and why other cultures are adopting it.

Hint: there is nothing inherent about a suit and tie that makes it more "professional" (or even functional) than any other mode of dress.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 06, 2008, 08:55:34 PM
SMH @ "everyone else wears this business stuff too" W/O questioning discourse in which idea of "professionalism" arose and what dominating force propagated it

Like where I said it originated in Anglo culture, but has spread throughout the world to the point where it has become an internationally accepted standard of dress. Today, it is perpetuated by professionals EVERYWHERE regardless of the narrow American viewpoints. If you want to attribute every accepted standard of buisiness in the world to some vague notion of what is apparently a "white" conspiracy, feel free to do so, but I will feel free to go ahead and call you a racist.

I'm done with this.

My final points:

1) There is a significant macro progrem in inequality of means between racial groups.

2) AA is not the perfect, but the only practical solution to this problem, and should continue, despite any issues of insensitivity to micro issues.

3) On the micro level, breaking things down racially doesn't make sense. There are fabulously wealthy and socially privileged black people in this country, and obscenely poor and socially disadvantaged non-blacks.

4) By perpetuating false and toxic ideas such as "all whites are privileged", people oversimplify and poison the racial dialogue in this country.

5) Though the lack of racial parity is still a significant issue in the US, it is fortunately becoming better; and will hopefully one day dissapear.

6) Though socioeconomic and class-based parity in this country is far better than it is in the majority of the world; it is slowly and frighteningly becoming worse, across racial and ethnic lines.

7) I'm glad that we have a multiracial presidential candidate who can successfully recognize and address these complex issues, without infantilizing the debate.

8 ) I appreciate the viewpoints of those who stand by their opinions about the concept of "white privilege". I do understand where you are coming from, I just respectfully disagree.

9) Again, "white privilege" might benefit some or most whites, but does absolutely nothing for those whites who are not in the soceoeconomic position to actually take advantage of it.

And that's that. Some will agree with me, some will disagree. That's ok. It's a complex issue, and there is more than one legitimate lens to examine it under.

Edit: And to completely underscore why the concept of a historical "white" hegemony ignores the very real facts that many  white social groups have been treated no differently than blacks, I include this one last tidbit. I hope you give it at least a little bit of thought:

http://archive.salon.com/books/it/2000/06/15/white_slaves/
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 06, 2008, 09:12:55 PM
You simply sound ridiculous.  So you believe that if White people wore baggy pants in the past then it would be professional now? ::) As you mentioned earlier many many people wore suits in the past.  Why don't you take a step back and look at it, are you telling me a person in a suit does not look better and better able to handle things than someone in baggy pants?  It has nothing to do with the color of the skin of the people before.  It isn't like the President of Africa wears around baggy pants all the time either.  It just doesn't look very clean cut.


Before contact and manipulation by European forces, the following was true:

1.  Professional/upper class Africans did not wear suits.
2.  Professional/upper class Asians did not wear suits.
3.  Professional/upper class Australasians did not wear suits.
4.  Professional/upper class Native Americans did not wear suits.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 06, 2008, 09:15:02 PM
SMH @ "everyone else wears this business stuff too" W/O questioning discourse in which idea of "professionalism" arose and what dominating force propagated it

Like where I said it originated in Anglo culture, but has spread throughout the world to the point where it has become an internationally accepted standard of dress. Today, it is perpetuated by professionals EVERYWHERE regardless of the narrow American viewpoints. If you want to attribute every accepted standard of buisiness in the world to some vague notion of what is apparently a "white" conspiracy, feel free to do so, but I will feel free to go ahead and call you a racist.

I'm done with this.

My final points:

1) There is a significant macro progrem in inequality of means between racial groups.

2) AA is not the perfect, but the only practical solution to this problem, and should continue, despite any issues of insensitivity to micro issues.

3) On the micro level, breaking things down racially doesn't make sense. There are fabulously wealthy and socially privileged black people in this country, and obscenely poor and socially disadvantaged non-blacks.

4) By perpetuating false and toxic ideas such as "all whites are privileged", people oversimplify and poison the racial dialogue in this country.

5) Though the lack of racial parity is still a significant issue in the US, it is fortunately becoming better; and will hopefully one day dissapear.

6) Though socioeconomic and class-based parity in this country is far better than it is in the majority of the world; it is slowly and frighteningly becoming worse, across racial and ethnic lines.

7) I'm glad that we have a multiracial presidential candidate who can successfully recognize and address these complex issues, without infantilizing the debate.

8 ) I appreciate the viewpoints of those who stand by their opinions about the concept of "white privilege". I do understand where you are coming from, I just respectfully disagree.

9) Again, "white privilege" might benefit some or most whites, but does absolutely nothing for those whites who are not in the soceoeconomic position to actually take advantage of it.

And that's that. Some will agree with me, some will disagree. That's ok. It's a complex issue, and there is more than one legitimate lens to examine it under.

Edit: And to completely underscore why the concept of a historical "white" hegemony ignores the very real facts that many  white social groups have been treated no differently than blacks, I include this one last tidbit. I hope you give it at least a little bit of thought:

http://archive.salon.com/books/it/2000/06/15/white_slaves/

Thanks for this post.  This is what I was looking for.  I'll go through it a little later, but I'll say right now that I actually agree with a number of your points. 
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 06, 2008, 09:24:29 PM
Thanks for reading and criticizing. :)
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: devilishlyblue on April 06, 2008, 09:32:00 PM
Hm.  This is not a rhetorical question.  Is it racist to expect waiters to speak English rather than Swahili?  I think the analogy holds: it is of European origin, became the "professional" standard (at least in the US) as a result of ... uh, racially disproportionate removal of specific cultural elements, but is not perfectly tied to actual "race" and can be alleviated by acquiring a new element.

Unlike a suit, in fact, learning to speak so-called standard English is not something that can be easily fixed.

In other words, I'm expanding on the discussion between Bears and DR here.  Just because something became dominant from a racist analysis, is it still racist?  Is it racist to say that baggy jeans are worse than a suit when (in our hypo) a black person can just put on a suit and remove the racism?  And if a white person can put on baggy jeans and create racism against himself?  Isn't racism supposed to be so insidious precisely because it's about factors beyond your control?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: naturallybeyoutiful on April 06, 2008, 09:38:59 PM
3) On the micro level, breaking things down racially doesn't make sense. There are fabulously wealthy and socially privileged black people in this country, and obscenely poor and socially disadvantaged non-blacks.
Breaking things down racially wouldn't make sense if racism only reared its ugly head when dealing with a certain subset of the black population.  Please don't make the mistake of assuming, however, that there is not some commonality between the experiences of even these two seemingly disparate groups, particularly as it relates to structural forces that work against people of color at every level of society.  The picture only becomes more complicated when the status of middle-class and working class blacks come into play.  Moreover, I find that many people are under the mistaken impression that black people live "chocolate-covered" lives of whatever life is like for whites of the same socioeconomic class.  This simply isn't the case, hasn't ever been the case, and--if blacks and whites don't find the courage to own up to our country's racist past and work together for real solutions--will never be the case!


4) By perpetuating false and toxic ideas such as "all whites are privileged", people oversimplify and poison the racial dialogue in this country.
I agree that the racial dialogue is sometimes oversimplified.  This does not, however, defeat the reality of privileges imbuing to white people by virtue of their whiteness.  I'd dare say that many of the aspects of life that you consider "normal" and "expected" are simply not true for others.  Sometimes, it can be a little like living in a foreign country -- what MLK callled "exile in [one's] own land."   Sure, some things have gotten better.  But that's because we've fought literally to the death to make them so!  Bottom line is, things are not equal!  Never have been.  Are not now.  This is simply the lived experience of whites AND blacks in this nation.  Wealthy white people may derive even more benefit from their whiteness than do poor whites, but it'd be incorrect to assume that poor whites thereby start at zero, so to speak.  Even poor whites enjoy advantages that, on average, still do not accrue to blacks of even a similar social status.  I'm not sure how we can ever solve some of the nation's problems if people refuse to admit this!

Furthermore, it would be helpful to reverse the oversimplification of the racial dialogue by defining the characteristics (e.g. earnings power, home ownership rates and the (sub)prime mortgage lending rates associated with them, higher education levels) behind each of the "comparable" sub-groups you reference -- middle-class blacks and middle class whites, for example.  I think people assume a parity that isn't there when making blanket assumptions of what blacks of a certain class do or not need.  Knee-jerk reactions in either direction are unfair, but particularly when they tend to ignore persistent disparities that this nation created by rule of law (de jure and de facto), tradition, and culture with devastating consequences for blacks in this nation -- free or slave, rich or poor!  (Where is my forty acres and a mule?!!?!  Plus interest!!!!  :( But I digress...)


5) Though the lack of racial parity is still a significant issue in the US, it is fortunately becoming better; and will hopefully one day dissapear.
Racism and race-based discrimination (which has, in turn, fueled blacks' economic "disadvantage") are cancers on the soul of this nation.  Always have been.  Wishful thinking and that dreaded idea of color-blindedness only serves to create a freeze-frame for the current state of things.  I want more!  I see no other feasible solution than both sides dealing with these issues across disciplines and head-on, in part by aggressively attacking the hidden assumptions, shameful history and enduring ramifications of generations of sin, slavery, and inhumanity!


6) Though socioeconomic and class-based parity in this country is far better than it is in the majority of the world; it is slowly and frighteningly becoming worse, across racial and ethnic lines.
Agreed!  Education plays an important role in perpetuating social inequality.  This is but one expression of racism in general, of course. In addition, personal choices and the exercise of responsibility and self-determination (or lack thereof) also play a part, too.  Clearly the solution to this issue is complex and multi-faceted.


9) Again, "white privilege" might benefit some or most whites, but does absolutely nothing for those whites who are not in the soceoeconomic position to actually take advantage of it.
Some who live on the other side of the color line, incl. myself, will disagree here. Talk to many poor whites and you find that they, too, have not had the good fortune of growing up in America without the tainting of race prejudice and its sundried social manifestations.  To say that poor whites get "absolutely nothing" in a society that still makes judgments about people based on the color of the skin flies in the face of history, logic, and lived experience!

My $0.02...
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: naturallybeyoutiful on April 06, 2008, 09:55:08 PM
Is it racist to expect waiters to speak English rather than Swahili?...Just because something became dominant from a racist analysis, is it still racist?  Is it racist to say that baggy jeans are worse than a suit when (in our hypo) a black person can just put on a suit and remove the racism?  And if a white person can put on baggy jeans and create racism against himself?  Isn't racism supposed to be so insidious precisely because it's about factors beyond your control?

Assuming that you are in good faith eagerly desiring to understand what racism is and isn't, here are my suggestions for you.  (I think you'll find the answer to your question many times over.)

Incidents in the Life of A Slave Girl by Harriet Jacobs
Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass by Frederick Douglass
The Life and Times of Olaudah Equiano by Olaudah Equiano
Bullwhip Days: The Slaves Remember by James Mellon (editor)
David Walker's Appeal by David Walker
Up from Slavery by Booker T. Washington
The Souls of Black Folk by W.E.B. DuBois
The Miseducation of the Negro by W.E.B. DuBois
Native Son by Richard Wright
Black Boy by Richard Wright
Groundwork: Charles Hamilton Houston and the Struggle for Civil Rights by Genna Rae McNeil
A Raisin in the Sun by Lorraine Hansberry
The Color Purple by Alice Walker
Letter from Birmingham Jail by Martin Luther King, Jr.
The Autobiography of Malcolm X

Then consider watching the screen adaptation of Alex Haley's play Roots, as well as all the videos in the Eyes on the Prize series.  Add to that list movies like Glory, Proud, Pride, etc.  I'm not sure how many of these things you have ever been exposed to (and given the sad state of public education in robbing blacks and whites in this country of an understanding of the true heritage of this nation), I'm likely to guess not many.  These might be of help in dispelling the notion that racism is something that people can "put off" and "put on" like articles of clothing.  If that were the case, black people would have rid themselves of clothes long ago!  It's not that simple, and unfortunately, it's hard to engage in a substantive, meaningful dialogue without some basic understanding of what those of us serious about addressing racial discrimination mean when we say "racism." 

I know some may look at this list (which is, at best, a meager start) and think -- Does it really take all that?  Given the fact that more of the same seems unlikely to really change things, I'd dare say yes, it does. 




Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 06, 2008, 10:00:35 PM
Hm.  This is not a rhetorical question.  Is it racist to expect waiters to speak English rather than Swahili?  I think the analogy holds: it is of European origin, became the "professional" standard (at least in the US) as a result of ... uh, racially disproportionate removal of specific cultural elements, but is not perfectly tied to actual "race" and can be alleviated by acquiring a new element.

Unlike a suit, in fact, learning to speak so-called standard English is not something that can be easily fixed.

In other words, I'm expanding on the discussion between Bears and DR here.  Just because something became dominant from a racist analysis, is it still racist?  Is it racist to say that baggy jeans are worse than a suit when (in our hypo) a black person can just put on a suit and remove the racism?  And if a white person can put on baggy jeans and create racism against himself?  Isn't racism supposed to be so insidious precisely because it's about factors beyond your control?

I see where you're coming from, but I think the clothing thing, specifically, is still charged because people continue to have negative associations with clothing that is associated with people of color, and positive associations with clothing that is associated with white people. Like I alluded to earlier, if you're going to the annual company picnic, there's nothing inherently more professional about wearing those hideous J Crew bermuda shorts with lobsters all over them than there is  about wearing mesh basketball shorts. But one would be socially acceptable in a semi-professional setting, and one wouldn't. And gee golly gosh, the former pair of shorts are typically associated with white people. Accident? I think it's unlikely.

I don't see why we should accept the fact that black people have to put on the trappings of white culture (e.g. a polo shirt and hideous shorts; the name Jake instead of DeShawn) in order for people to say that, yeah, that counts as mainstream, and now you deserve to be taken seriously. There's nothing inherently wrong with the name DeShawn that would make you think that person would be a worse employee than Jake; if DeShawn doesn't get an interview, but Jake with-the-same-resume does, I'm going to assert that it's not because that's what DeShawn deserves for not being mainstream. It's because the resume-reader is assuming something about DeShawn, and then making inferences based on that assumption. Which is a problem.

Before that experiment, no one seriously considered the claim that people with stereotypically black names were discriminated against solely for that reason in the hiring market. Duh, that would be clearly and obviously racist. Now Bearly wants to come in here and claim that, like, no duh, they're discriminated against because their names are stereotypically black, but also did you know it happens against everyone including omg some disadvantaged white people? Which is horseshit, frankly.

Language, for me, is different and more complicated, because there are practical necessities associated with language that simply aren't there when it comes to clothing or naming conventions. With the latter, I think it's clear we shouldn't insist on a cultural norm--especially not one that marginalizes many parts of black culture--and simply label it "the mainstream" without at least, AT LEAST, thinking about what exactly we mean by that.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 06, 2008, 10:13:33 PM
Naturallybeyoutiful, I want to thank you for writing your response and ackgnowlege that many of your points are salient, even if I don't entirely agree with some of them.

(REDACTED - Because I think I have already said what needed to be said)
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: devilishlyblue on April 06, 2008, 11:02:47 PM
I'm not sure how many of these things you have ever been exposed to
  Four.  Which is why this thread is good for me.


These might be of help in dispelling the notion that racism is something that people can "put off" and "put on" like articles of clothing.
Sorry, should have been clearer.  I meant specifically in the context of the clothing-based-racism we were discussing over the last few posts.  Obviously black people, even when wearing suits, still experience racism.  My question was this: There is undoubtedly an additional discrimination that gets added thanks to fashion trends.  To what extent is it legitimate to consider these trends "racist" simply because their origins are racist?

They are, of course, unfair in a social sense, although it's unclear on whom we should place blame exactly.  (Employers?  Customers?  Employers for going along with the perceived racial prejudices of their customers?  Media?  Etc.)  And this is, of course, not the entirety (or even the majority) of racism in this country.  I'm quibbling about a very specific point: is clothing-based discrimination specifically, at this time, legitimately considered to fall under the umbrella of racist behavior?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: saneac2 on April 07, 2008, 03:33:20 AM
I grew up in mobile home in Southeastern Kentucky within a stones throw of a coal mine.  My mother and father have had to absolutely kill themselves just provide what little we have.  During college I worked two jobs in order to keep the rent paid.  One of my best friends and current roomate, whom I met during my freshman year, is black.  His mother is a judge, and his father is a financial analyst.  Let it suffice that my family's entire living quarters could probably fit into his living room. Although he had no real interest in law, his family placed a considerable amount of pressure on him to pursue a career in law.  We applied to many of the same schools because we felt that it would be nice if we could attend law school together.  Despite having a 6 point lower LSAT score and a 4 point lower GPA he was accepted to all three of our top choices and I was denied. 

AA is bull and you would be hard pressed to convince me otherwise.   
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: simonsays on April 07, 2008, 03:41:47 AM
You simply sound ridiculous.  So you believe that if White people wore baggy pants in the past then it would be professional now? ::) As you mentioned earlier many many people wore suits in the past.  Why don't you take a step back and look at it, are you telling me a person in a suit does not look better and better able to handle things than someone in baggy pants?  It has nothing to do with the color of the skin of the people before.  It isn't like the President of Africa wears around baggy pants all the time either.  It just doesn't look very clean cut.


Before contact and manipulation by European forces, the following was true:

1.  Professional/upper class Africans did not wear suits.
2.  Professional/upper class Asians did not wear suits.
3.  Professional/upper class Australasians did not wear suits.
4.  Professional/upper class Native Americans did not wear suits.



They also didn't wipe their ass with toilet paper..  anything less than a biday deserves scrutiny?

Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 07, 2008, 03:54:12 AM
You simply sound ridiculous.  So you believe that if White people wore baggy pants in the past then it would be professional now? ::) As you mentioned earlier many many people wore suits in the past.  Why don't you take a step back and look at it, are you telling me a person in a suit does not look better and better able to handle things than someone in baggy pants?  It has nothing to do with the color of the skin of the people before.  It isn't like the President of Africa wears around baggy pants all the time either.  It just doesn't look very clean cut.


Before contact and manipulation by European forces, the following was true:

1.  Professional/upper class Africans did not wear suits.
2.  Professional/upper class Asians did not wear suits.
3.  Professional/upper class Australasians did not wear suits.
4.  Professional/upper class Native Americans did not wear suits.



They also didn't wipe their ass with toilet paper..  anything less than a biday deserves scrutiny?




Do you have anything better than this weak strawman analogy?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 07:07:27 AM
I grew up in mobile home in Southeastern Kentucky within a stones throw of a coal mine.  My mother and father have had to absolutely kill themselves just provide what little we have.  During college I worked two jobs in order to keep the rent paid.  One of my best friends and current roomate, whom I met during my freshman year, is black.  His mother is a judge, and his father is a financial analyst.  Let it suffice that my family's entire living quarters could probably fit into his living room. Although he had no real interest in law, his family placed a considerable amount of pressure on him to pursue a career in law.  We applied to many of the same schools because we felt that it would be nice if we could attend law school together.  Despite having a 6 point lower LSAT score and a 4 point lower GPA he was accepted to all three of our top choices and I was denied. 

AA is bull and you would be hard pressed to convince me otherwise.   
But dood, unlike your wealthy African American friend, you are privileged! You belong to the mainstream culture! There are lots more white people on TV than black people. When you go into a 7-11, the clerk doesn't look at you susiciously. You can find bandaids that match your skin. As a lawyer you will be wearing lotsa suits, and didn't white guys invent suits?! I can go on and on. There is a whole checklist for why you are privileged (though the retarded suit thing isn't on it :( ), it's a couple of pages back. You should check it out and feel really guilty about what you just said!

Did you know that even the wealthiest black people face discrimination? I read this article about Robert Johnson, the first black billionaire, who was getting behind the wheel of his Mercedes Benz, and some racist old white lady ran out in an embarrassed huff. She assumed that he was the chauffer because he was black. That's REALLY screwed up - even Bob Johnson is discriminated against! I bet that never happens to you when you get into your Mercedes!  >:(

Why don't you just accept that you are privileged, go back to your double-wide and realize that you don't deserve to be treated like an equal human being because some other white doods who you have never met do the same thing to black people.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Ghost on April 07, 2008, 07:48:14 AM
I grew up in mobile home in Southeastern Kentucky within a stones throw of a coal mine.  My mother and father have had to absolutely kill themselves just provide what little we have.  During college I worked two jobs in order to keep the rent paid.  One of my best friends and current roomate, whom I met during my freshman year, is black.  His mother is a judge, and his father is a financial analyst.  Let it suffice that my family's entire living quarters could probably fit into his living room. Although he had no real interest in law, his family placed a considerable amount of pressure on him to pursue a career in law.  We applied to many of the same schools because we felt that it would be nice if we could attend law school together.  Despite having a 6 point lower LSAT score and a 4 point lower GPA he was accepted to all three of our top choices and I was denied. 

AA is bull and you would be hard pressed to convince me otherwise.   

Oh look, another hard-lifer.

This board is full of them!

How queer it is that every white person here suffered so much...
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Ghost on April 07, 2008, 07:50:11 AM
I grew up in mobile home in Southeastern Kentucky within a stones throw of a coal mine.  My mother and father have had to absolutely kill themselves just provide what little we have.  During college I worked two jobs in order to keep the rent paid.  One of my best friends and current roomate, whom I met during my freshman year, is black.  His mother is a judge, and his father is a financial analyst.  Let it suffice that my family's entire living quarters could probably fit into his living room. Although he had no real interest in law, his family placed a considerable amount of pressure on him to pursue a career in law.  We applied to many of the same schools because we felt that it would be nice if we could attend law school together.  Despite having a 6 point lower LSAT score and a 4 point lower GPA he was accepted to all three of our top choices and I was denied. 

AA is bull and you would be hard pressed to convince me otherwise.   
But dood, unlike your wealthy African American friend, you are privileged! You belong to the mainstream culture! There are lots more white people on TV than black people. When you go into a 7-11, the clerk doesn't look at you susiciously. You can find bandaids that match your skin. As a lawyer you will be wearing lotsa suits, and didn't white guys invent suits?! I can go on and on. There is a whole checklist for why you are privileged (though the retarded suit thing isn't on it :( ), it's a couple of pages back. You should check it out and feel really guilty about what you just said!

Did you know that even the wealthiest black people face discrimination? I read this article about Robert Johnson, the first black billionaire, who was getting behind the wheel of his Mercedes Benz, and some racist old white lady ran out in an embarrassed huff. She assumed that he was the chauffer because he was black. That's REALLY screwed up - even Bob Johnson is discriminated against! I bet that never happens to you when you get into your Mercedes!  >:(

Why don't you just accept that you are privileged, go back to your double-wide and realize that you don't deserve to be treated like an equal human being because some other white doods who you have never met do the same thing to black people.

Uh oh...this thread starting to get to you? You've done so well in actually making intelligent argument, and now you piss it all away with this garbage.

Are you going to fly off the deep end like that other guy in the Is This Really The Case thread?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 09:02:08 AM
I grew up in mobile home in Southeastern Kentucky within a stones throw of a coal mine.  My mother and father have had to absolutely kill themselves just provide what little we have.  During college I worked two jobs in order to keep the rent paid.  One of my best friends and current roomate, whom I met during my freshman year, is black.  His mother is a judge, and his father is a financial analyst.  Let it suffice that my family's entire living quarters could probably fit into his living room. Although he had no real interest in law, his family placed a considerable amount of pressure on him to pursue a career in law.  We applied to many of the same schools because we felt that it would be nice if we could attend law school together.  Despite having a 6 point lower LSAT score and a 4 point lower GPA he was accepted to all three of our top choices and I was denied. 

AA is bull and you would be hard pressed to convince me otherwise.   
But dood, unlike your wealthy African American friend, you are privileged! You belong to the mainstream culture! There are lots more white people on TV than black people. When you go into a 7-11, the clerk doesn't look at you susiciously. You can find bandaids that match your skin. As a lawyer you will be wearing lotsa suits, and didn't white guys invent suits?! I can go on and on. There is a whole checklist for why you are privileged (though the retarded suit thing isn't on it :( ), it's a couple of pages back. You should check it out and feel really guilty about what you just said!

Did you know that even the wealthiest black people face discrimination? I read this article about Robert Johnson, the first black billionaire, who was getting behind the wheel of his Mercedes Benz, and some racist old white lady ran out in an embarrassed huff. She assumed that he was the chauffer because he was black. That's REALLY screwed up - even Bob Johnson is discriminated against! I bet that never happens to you when you get into your Mercedes!  >:(

Why don't you just accept that you are privileged, go back to your double-wide and realize that you don't deserve to be treated like an equal human being because some other white doods who you have never met do the same thing to black people.

Uh oh...this thread starting to get to you? You've done so well in actually making intelligent argument, and now you piss it all away with this garbage.

Are you going to fly off the deep end like that other guy in the Is This Really The Case thread?
Nope. I'm not really phased. I have stated my beliefs and why I believe them. I think I am entitled to a little bit of eye rolling myself once in a while.   :)

Edit - If you want a non-ironic explanation, the point is that black people can and do suffer from skin-color based disadvantages that do not in turn benefit individual white people in any way (a/k/a white privilege.) Just because black people are hurt (which I have conceded multiple times) doesn't therefore mean that all white people have an advantage.

Also, you know, some of us actually have led difficult lives. Don't be a glib a-hole. I don't disregard your struggle, please don't disregard mine.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 09:50:23 AM
Seriously: every time you continue to deny the existence or significance of white privilege as a major component of institutional racism and discrimination, you are disregarding the struggle of non-whites. I'll leave it at that. If you seriously don't see that...yeah. I don't know, at this point. If you're so invested in looking at your own belly button and feeling bad for yourself, it's unclear to me that you can really be a partner in the struggle against racism.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 10:42:09 AM
Seriously: every time you continue to deny the existence or significance of white privilege as a major component of institutional racism and discrimination, you are disregarding the struggle of non-whites. I'll leave it at that. If you seriously don't see that...yeah. I don't know, at this point. If you're so invested in looking at your own belly button and feeling bad for yourself, it's unclear to me that you can really be a partner in the struggle against racism.
I don't care, dashrashi.  I'm a little bit more concerned about what the conditions on the street are like for people living in poverty - black, white, NA, asian, middle eastern, etc. etc. etc. than I am in being your partner in some ideological agenda.

I can recognize that racism is a vast problem without discounting the other problems in our society that are equally pervasive and damaging.

Why the hell would I want to be your partner? Your approval is not a necessary element in my fight for social justice. You talk big talk about racism, while I spend thousands of hours trying to exonerate minorities who have been victimized by the criminal justice system. Unlike you, though, I am willing to recognize that the mentally-impaired white guy in Texas who was wrongfully convicted on a multiple-homicide because he was coerced into a confession (though he wasn't even in the city where the crime took place at the time) has also had his civil rights badly violated, and is not the recipient of your phantom "privilege." And I am willing to defend his rights to my dying day no matter whether or not you or the NAACP, the ACLU, the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Innocence Project are willing to go to bat for him - just because he is WHITE.

I also like how you get offended when I mention your pedigree in conversation, but are more than willing to throw mine back in my face. Go @#!* yourself. I am done humoring your bull.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: NYU2011 on April 07, 2008, 10:45:01 AM
I grew up in mobile home in Southeastern Kentucky within a stones throw of a coal mine.  My mother and father have had to absolutely kill themselves just provide what little we have.  During college I worked two jobs in order to keep the rent paid.  One of my best friends and current roomate, whom I met during my freshman year, is black.  His mother is a judge, and his father is a financial analyst.  Let it suffice that my family's entire living quarters could probably fit into his living room. Although he had no real interest in law, his family placed a considerable amount of pressure on him to pursue a career in law.  We applied to many of the same schools because we felt that it would be nice if we could attend law school together.  Despite having a 6 point lower LSAT score and a 4 point lower GPA he was accepted to all three of our top choices and I was denied. 

AA is bull and you would be hard pressed to convince me otherwise.   

Oh look, another hard-lifer.

This board is full of them!

How queer it is that every white person here suffered so much...


That is kind of the point of what we are saying.  There are many many white people that have it just as bad off as the minorities you are talking about
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: NYU2011 on April 07, 2008, 10:47:21 AM
Seriously: every time you continue to deny the existence or significance of white privilege as a major component of institutional racism and discrimination, you are disregarding the struggle of non-whites. I'll leave it at that. If you seriously don't see that...yeah. I don't know, at this point. If you're so invested in looking at your own belly button and feeling bad for yourself, it's unclear to me that you can really be a partner in the struggle against racism.


And as long as you pretend that poor white people are better off than middle class minorities and therefore the middle class minorities need the help of affirmative action at the expense of the poor white people you will be fighting against equality of opportunity.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: filet o' fish on April 07, 2008, 11:19:56 AM
Lol @ reading comprehension skills.

Some of you come up with straw men like it's second nature. Congrats on that.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 12:19:46 PM
Seriously: every time you continue to deny the existence or significance of white privilege as a major component of institutional racism and discrimination, you are disregarding the struggle of non-whites. I'll leave it at that. If you seriously don't see that...yeah. I don't know, at this point. If you're so invested in looking at your own belly button and feeling bad for yourself, it's unclear to me that you can really be a partner in the struggle against racism.
I don't care, dashrashi.  I'm a little bit more concerned about what the conditions on the street are like for people living in poverty - black, white, NA, asian, middle eastern, etc. etc. etc. than I am in being your partner in some ideological agenda.

I can recognize that racism is a vast problem without discounting the other problems in our society that are equally pervasive and damaging.

Why the hell would I want to be your partner? Your approval is not a necessary element in my fight for social justice. You talk big talk about racism, while I spend thousands of hours trying to exonerate minorities who have been victimized by the criminal justice system. Unlike you, though, I am willing to recognize that the mentally-impaired white guy in Texas who was wrongfully convicted on a multiple-homicide because he was coerced into a confession (though he wasn't even in the city where the crime took place at the time) has also had his civil rights badly violated, and is not the recipient of your phantom "privilege." And I am willing to defend his rights to my dying day no matter whether or not you or the NAACP, the ACLU, the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Innocence Project are willing to go to bat for him - just because he is WHITE.

I also like how you get offended when I mention your pedigree in conversation, but are more than willing to throw mine back in my face. Go @#!* yourself. I am done humoring your bull.

You seriously must be having some sort of neurological event. No one is denying that the mentally-impaired white guy has it real f-ing rough. But the fact that he A) is white and B) has it rough does nothing to prove that white privilege doesn't exist. I'm even willing to go so far as to say that he did in fact benefit at some point from being white, although his current situation doesn't reflect that he's had any benefits at all.

Why in the @#!* would you say that the Innocence Project wouldn't go to bat for him because he's white? Are you on crack? Do you have any proof to support this beyond the ravings of the multitude of unprivileged voices in your head?

No one's discounting the other social problems. They clearly exist and are a huge f-ing problem. But it is my opinion that you exacerbate them when you prop up a racist, classist, monumentally-screwed-up-in-lots-of-other-ways system by denying that there is such a thing as white privilege.

You're being obtuse. As usual.

And for the record, if you didn't make every other post in this arena about your background and how rough you had it despite being white, and the time you got beat up omg because you were white and those black people really have all the power in the hood, then maybe I would be able to resist reading into your position what I know of your life experiences. Just a thought.

Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 12:34:13 PM
Quote
You seriously must be having some sort of neurological event. No one is denying that the mentally-impaired white guy has it real f-ing rough. But the fact that he A) is white and B) has it rough does nothing to prove that white privilege doesn't exist. I'm even willing to go so far as to say that he did in fact benefit at some point from being white, although his current situation doesn't reflect that he's had any benefits at all.
He DIDN'T! He grew up in a foster home, and got raised in the prison system, where he was abused, raped, and mistreated throughout his life. Check out all that "white privilege!" What a lucky guy!

Quote
Why in the @#!* would you say that the Innocence Project wouldn't go to bat for him because he's white? Are you on crack? Do you have any proof to support this beyond the ravings of the multitude of unprivileged voices in your head?
I would say this because I am CURRENTLY working on his case, and the innocence project HAS rejected our multitude requests to file amici on his behalf.

Quote
No one's discounting the other social problems. They clearly exist and are a huge f-ing problem. But it is my opinion that you exacerbate them when you prop up a racist, classist, monumentally-screwed-up-in-lots-of-other-ways system by denying that there is such a thing as white privilege.
When the concept of "white privilege" is used to deny poor white, asian, and middle-eastern people equal access to legal protection, as well as create conditions where they are discriminated against in home and educational lending, you are perpetuating a racist and classist assumption. Feel free to continue doing so,  but your position is both ethically and intellectually bankrupt.

Quote
You're being obtuse. As usual.
And, as usual, you are being a complete shill for mainstream liberal positions without actually considering the implications of said positions on people who are decidedly underprivileged in every conceivable way, but don't happen to belong to a minority group that has decades worth of political, social, educational and cultural recognition for their struggle - and the significant social support systems that go along with that recognition.

Quote
And for the record, if you didn't make every other post in this arena about your background and how rough you had it despite being white, and the time you got beat up omg because you were white and those black people really have all the power in the hood, then maybe I would be able to resist reading into your position what I know of your life experiences. Just a thought.
And for the record, I should be allowed to discuss how misbegotten generalizations of "white privilege" have been used against me and my family by people who have been decidedly more privileged than we could ever hope to be without having some idiot throw that in my face to invalidate my position. I don't go around telling black people that their opinion on racial injustice doesn't count because they are black. Don't go throwing my struggle in my face to tell me that somehow I can't understand what white privilege is and what it is not.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: guess! on April 07, 2008, 12:39:16 PM
::grows up in suburbs::

::attends ivy league undergrad::

::takes off for a few years to see the world::

::attends ivy league law school::

::accepts offer at white shoe law firm::

::enjoys white privilege::
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 12:43:19 PM
::grows up in suburbs::

::attends ivy league undergrad::

::takes off for a few years to see the world::

::attends ivy league law school::

::accepts offer at white shoe law firm::

::enjoys white high SES privilege::
Fix't.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 01:23:42 PM
Quote
You seriously must be having some sort of neurological event. No one is denying that the mentally-impaired white guy has it real f-ing rough. But the fact that he A) is white and B) has it rough does nothing to prove that white privilege doesn't exist. I'm even willing to go so far as to say that he did in fact benefit at some point from being white, although his current situation doesn't reflect that he's had any benefits at all.
He DIDN'T! He grew up in a foster home, and got raised in the prison system, where he was abused, raped, and mistreated throughout his life. Check out all that "white privilege!" What a lucky guy!

Quote
Why in the @#!* would you say that the Innocence Project wouldn't go to bat for him because he's white? Are you on crack? Do you have any proof to support this beyond the ravings of the multitude of unprivileged voices in your head?
I would say this because I am CURRENTLY working on his case, and the innocence project HAS rejected our multitude requests to file amici on his behalf.

Quote
No one's discounting the other social problems. They clearly exist and are a huge f-ing problem. But it is my opinion that you exacerbate them when you prop up a racist, classist, monumentally-screwed-up-in-lots-of-other-ways system by denying that there is such a thing as white privilege.
When the concept of "white privilege" is used to deny poor white, asian, and middle-eastern people equal access to legal protection, as well as create conditions where they are discriminated against in home and educational lending, you are perpetuating a racist and classist assumption. Feel free to continue doing so,  but your position is both ethically and intellectually bankrupt.

Quote
You're being obtuse. As usual.
And, as usual, you are being a complete shill for mainstream liberal positions without actually considering the implications of said positions on people who are decidedly underprivileged in every conceivable way, but don't happen to belong to a minority group that has decades worth of political, social, educational and cultural recognition for their struggle - and the significant social support systems that go along with that recognition.

Quote
And for the record, if you didn't make every other post in this arena about your background and how rough you had it despite being white, and the time you got beat up omg because you were white and those black people really have all the power in the hood, then maybe I would be able to resist reading into your position what I know of your life experiences. Just a thought.
And for the record, I should be allowed to discuss how misbegotten generalizations of "white privilege" have been used against me and my family by people who have been decidedly more privileged than we could ever hope to be without having some idiot throw that in my face to invalidate my position. I don't go around telling black people that their opinion on racial injustice doesn't count because they are black. Don't go throwing my struggle in my face to tell me that somehow I can't understand what white privilege is and what it is not.


First of all, you are turning into Lindbergh. Congratulations.

Second, and just as a representative sample of your monumental not-getting-it, I asked for proof that the IP isn't helping him because he's white, and you responded by telling me that they have refused to file an amicus brief for him. You haven't spoken at all to why the IP did so, merely reiterated that you know for certain that they haven't helped him to date. So, you haven't even remotely responded to my point, merely repeated yours, without any support. Nothing new there as far as this thread goes. So I'll ask it again.

Do you seriously think it's reverse racism? That the IP only cares about non-white people? That they aren't filing an amicus brief for him because he's white, and not because they are a non-profit with limited resources or any other reasonable explanation? Does the IP make a habit of discriminating against white people? Aren't there white people that the IP has exonerated, or written amicus briefs for? I ask again: are you on crack?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 01:30:47 PM
Christ. Allow me to try one more time. I don't know why.

Saying that there is white privilege != all white people are privileged in the sense that those here who just can't see it (primarily bearly, but I think there are others) seem to think. Bearly, you've taken issue with someone apparently saying that all white people start on third base? I'm not going to go back and look for it. Okay. Depending on how you interpret that, I can see how you might take issue with it. That's fine. Let's set aside that for the moment and consider what white privilege actually is.

First allow me to say that, really and truly, I understand that race is not a black and white (heh) issue. I'm not attempting to simplify it into that, pigeon-hole people, etc. I'm also not trying to suggest that race is the only thing that matters. Acknowledging that it does matter is not the same as saying that it is the only thing that matters. Certainly, when you attempt to explain a concept such as white privilege, it is easier to explain the concept without the use of extensive modifiers to say "but if you're a white person with that experience, then maybe it will be more like this...or maybe that other thing isn't something you experience the same way Bobby MillionaireHeir does." That doesn't mean that the person explaining/defending it doesn't understand that it is complicated, or doesn't expect the person that they are speaking to to understand that as well. Finally, the checklist that was posted is not the ultimate, be-all end-all authority on white privilege, and its existence does not need to imply that all white people have experienced everything on that list in the same way in some universal "white person" experience. It is an indication of the kinds of ways that our society often privileges white people.

If you want to argue about how white privilege should factor into the policy decisions we make, that's perfectly fine. I may disagree with you, and I may not. Iím probably not going to get up on a soap box and argue that white privilege means that AA is the best idea we ever had. Other people might, and, you know, if thatís what they think, thatís their right. But what I'm concerned about here is the continued denial that white privilege does operate, seemingly primarily supported by contentions that some white people have really hard lives and some black people have really awesome lives, that sometimes some black people get things some white people don't, that there are some black people whose lives you would rather have than your own. White privilege doesn't say that this isn't so, or that this isn't possible. It doesn't say that it doesn't suck to be a poor white person, too. It doesn't say that there aren't other forms of discrimination than racism and/or bias against non-white people, and it doesn't say that our identities and experiences aren't complicated. It doesn't say that the privileges that accompany being white necessarily trump any other detriments or trials a white person might face in some cosmic tally.

What white privilege does mean is that there is a set of psychological, pecuniary, interpersonal, etc. benefits that are available to white people because they are white. It doesn't mean that all of those potential benefits are actualized in every white person's life, but that they are available, and that it would be pretty f-ing challenging to find a white person who hasn't benefited in some way from being white, even if that doesn't mean that they're rich and highly educated and have a nice car and a big house and a cushy life.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 01:38:35 PM
You guys are talking about two different things here. Under privileged and under represented are not the same thing. AA exists as an attempt to make up for years of institutionalized under representation by minorities in the legal field. Be that either because by law for a long period of the profession they were not allowed to work in it, or because of more recent latent, but illegal racism. Its about helping those that under represented NOT about helping those that are under privileged. Its not to change them from under privileged to privileged. Its to get them better represented in the field be that as public interest lawyers, PDís, legal aid or big firm partners. So long as you equate AA with making blacks ďricherĒ:at the expense of poor whites youíre not looking at under representation, youíre looking at under privileged as the goal of AA. Its not the goal or the purpose. So it does not matter if a middle class black benfits, so long as he is still under represented in the field of law, AA is working.

There are plenty of under privileged white, yellow and brown people, but AA is not about helping them get more opportunities to make more money. They are not under represented as group, there are a lot of poor people. The vast majority of middle class Americans started out poor when they first came to this country. The American way is make yourself better off than your parents, not to have the government do it for you just becuse your poor. The difference is that for minorities they were not only poor but ALSO faced institutionalized barriers against them picking themselves up by their boot straps and moving into the next higher class. Under privileged and underrepresented are not one in the same thing, one is the point of AA the other is not. You can be white in this country AND be under privileged, but youíre not under represented, but you can be both if youíre a minority.

Agreed. 100%. The privilege discussion came about from an offensive digression from a poster who claimed that "all white people start of on third base". Again, I support AA and I susport equal representation in the legal (and all other) professional fields - but I controvert the concept of white privilege being broadly attributed to all individual white people regardless of socio-economic status.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 01:47:44 PM
Christ. Allow me to try one more time. I don't know why.

Saying that there is white privilege != all white people are privileged in the sense that those here who just can't see it (primarily bearly, but I think there are others) seem to think. Bearly, you've taken issue with someone apparently saying that all white people start on third base? I'm not going to go back and look for it. Okay. Depending on how you interpret that, I can see how you might take issue with it. That's fine. Let's set aside that for the moment and consider what white privilege actually is.

First allow me to say that, really and truly, I understand that race is not a black and white (heh) issue. I'm not attempting to simplify it into that, pigeon-hole people, etc. I'm also not trying to suggest that race is the only thing that matters. Acknowledging that it does matter is not the same as saying that it is the only thing that matters. Certainly, when you attempt to explain a concept such as white privilege, it is easier to explain the concept without the use of extensive modifiers to say "but if you're a white person with that experience, then maybe it will be more like this...or maybe that other thing isn't something you experience the same way Bobby MillionaireHeir does." That doesn't mean that the person explaining/defending it doesn't understand that it is complicated, or doesn't expect the person that they are speaking to to understand that as well. Finally, the checklist that was posted is not the ultimate, be-all end-all authority on white privilege, and its existence does not need to imply that all white people have experienced everything on that list in the same way in some universal "white person" experience. It is an indication of the kinds of ways that our society often privileges white people.

If you want to argue about how white privilege should factor into the policy decisions we make, that's perfectly fine. I may disagree with you, and I may not. Iím probably not going to get up on a soap box and argue that white privilege means that AA is the best idea we ever had. Other people might, and, you know, if thatís what they think, thatís their right. But what I'm concerned about here is the continued denial that white privilege does operate, seemingly primarily supported by contentions that some white people have really hard lives and some black people have really awesome lives, that sometimes some black people get things some white people don't, that there are some black people whose lives you would rather have than your own. White privilege doesn't say that this isn't so, or that this isn't possible. It doesn't say that it doesn't suck to be a poor white person, too. It doesn't say that there aren't other forms of discrimination than racism and/or bias against non-white people, and it doesn't say that our identities and experiences aren't complicated. It doesn't say that the privileges that accompany being white necessarily trump any other detriments or trials a white person might face in some cosmic tally.

What white privilege does mean is that there is a set of psychological, pecuniary, interpersonal, etc. benefits that are available to white people because they are white. It doesn't mean that all of those potential benefits are actualized in every white person's life, but that they are available, and that it would be pretty f-ing challenging to find a white person who hasn't benefited in some way from being white, even if that doesn't mean that they're rich and highly educated and have a nice car and a big house and a cushy life.


He disputes this. I'm not going to speculate as to why he does so anymore. It wouldn't be polite. 

Thanks for the reasoned discourse, too. I myself am losing patience with the myopia; it affects my argumentation style.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 01:58:49 PM
Quote
First of all, you are turning into Lindbergh. Congratulations.
First of all, thank you. Although Lindbergh and I disagreed on a great deal of things (AA included), I always respected his eloquence and his positions as a poster. The fact that you go out of your way to insult me in every post rather than debate actual concepts further illustrates how you are a complete windbag. Congratulations on making snide remarks to someone trying to expand the dialogue past the obvious diatribe that always takes place on the AA forum.

Seems like XO is all about people shouting "AA is horseshit because rich black people are advantaged" and LSD is all about people shouting "STFU whitey, your position is horseshit because you are advantaged!" Both sides never actually considering the issues in their totality.

Quote
Second, and just as a representative sample of your monumental not-getting-it, I asked for proof that the IP isn't helping him because he's white, and you responded by telling me that they have refused to file an amicus brief for him. You haven't spoken at all to why the IP did so, merely reiterated that you know for certain that they haven't helped him to date. So, you haven't even remotely responded to my point, merely repeated yours, without any support. Nothing new there as far as this thread goes. So I'll ask it again.

Do you seriously think it's reverse racism? That the IP only cares about non-white people? That they aren't filing an amicus brief for him because he's white, and not because they are a non-profit with limited resources or any other reasonable explanation? Does the IP make a habit of discriminating against white people? Aren't there white people that the IP has exonerated, or written amicus briefs for? I ask again: are you on crack?
IP refuses to file the brief specifically because there ARE limited resources. It is far more politically beneficial to commit limited resources to helping individuals in a group that has been traditionally categorized as mistreated than helping a group that is considered "advantaged", no matter the individual repercussions.

Poor black people have the institutional help and support of the NAACP, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and thousands of local not-for profits that specifically benefit them, with no regard to underprivileged individuals of other races. Similarly, poor black entrepreneurs have thousands of organizations and laws across the country to benefit them that underprivileged members of other races don't have access to.  Poor black students have access to favorable college loans and scholarships that no other underprivileged people have access to.

In short, at the lowest echelons of society, there is pervasive and wide-spread racial discrimination, specifically BECAUSE people like you maintain that some vague group of "white" people are privileged. Sure, rich white people are privileged. Sure, middle-income white people are privileged. But no - when you compare apples to apples, poor black people in the US have FAR more access to institutional programs than members of other races do. To maintain "white privilege" for these meanest members of American society is a pernicious lie.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 02:04:34 PM
You guys are talking about two different things here. Under privileged and under represented are not the same thing. AA exists as an attempt to make up for years of institutionalized under representation by minorities in the legal field. Be that either because by law for a long period of the profession they were not allowed to work in it, or because of more recent latent, but illegal racism. Its about helping those that under represented NOT about helping those that are under privileged. Its not to change them from under privileged to privileged. Its to get them better represented in the field be that as public interest lawyers, PDís, legal aid or big firm partners. So long as you equate AA with making blacks ďricherĒ:at the expense of poor whites youíre not looking at under representation, youíre looking at under privileged as the goal of AA. Its not the goal or the purpose. So it does not matter if a middle class black benfits, so long as he is still under represented in the field of law, AA is working.

There are plenty of under privileged white, yellow and brown people, but AA is not about helping them get more opportunities to make more money. They are not under represented as group, there are a lot of poor people. The vast majority of middle class Americans started out poor when they first came to this country. The American way is make yourself better off than your parents, not to have the government do it for you just becuse your poor. The difference is that for minorities they were not only poor but ALSO faced institutionalized barriers against them picking themselves up by their boot straps and moving into the next higher class. Under privileged and underrepresented are not one in the same thing, one is the point of AA the other is not. You can be white in this country AND be under privileged, but youíre not under represented, but you can be both if youíre a minority.

Agreed. 100%. The privilege discussion came about from an offensive digression from a poster who claimed that "all white people start of on third base". Again, I support AA and I susport equal representation in the legal (and all other) professional fields - but I controvert the concept of white privilege being broadly attributed to all individual white people regardless of socio-economic status.

White privilege exists in that any given underprivileged white person has the same potential to eventually become the CEO of some future 100 company as any other given underprivileged white person. They face the same obstacles in reaching that goal based on starting out as underprivileged. There are no inherent barriers based on race, only on class for the white person. A minority underprivileged person would face the same barriers as a white underprivileged person based on class with the added barrier of race and historic under representation and bias towards them. The white person, even though poor, is born into a society that does not add that second layer of obstacles upon them. White privilege, at least as I see it, means I donít have to fight two uphill battles, class and race, to get to the top if I'm white.
I disagree 100%. An underprivileged white person in this society does not have access to any of the institutional enablers that have vastly improved the economic position of black people in the US over the last 50 years. They do not have AA, they do not have "black only" college loans, they do not get priority on government contracts due to minority status.

Though racism does persist, there is a much larger system in place today for an underprivileged black person to escape poverty than an underprivileged white person. The perpetuation of the myth of "white privilege" also widens this divide.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Freak on April 07, 2008, 02:10:15 PM
I have difficulty with AA because it institutionalizes treating people in groups rather than as individuals - the same reason I have a problem with racism. Since institutions (and individuals for that matter) will always do so, it seems that soci-economic status is a whole lot more objective.

Underrepresentation doesn't bother me - racism does.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 02:11:30 PM

He disputes this. I'm not going to speculate as to why he does so anymore. It wouldn't be polite. 

Thanks for the reasoned discourse, too. I myself am losing patience with the myopia; it affects my argumentation style.

Confidential to dash: Yes (it wouldn't be polite. but i'm with you)

Also, it's better than the two seminar papers that I have less than a month to complete? Marginally? Or at least requires less reading?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 02:12:47 PM
Do yourself a favor, argumentation-wise. Do not describe again all the wonderful institutions black folks have to take advantage of without something more concrete to back you up, e.g. statistics about how useful those institutions are, what proportion of underprivileged people of color directly benefit from their very resource-limited activities, etc. Also, please consider that those institutions were founded precisely to try and even out the disparity between same-SES whites and non-whites (some would call this disparity a result of white privilege), and that you haven't offered any concrete evidence to show that they've even remotely come close to accomplishing this mission. Furthermore, consider that there are other institutions (e.g. nationality-limited scholarships, see one example here: http://www.scholarships4students.com/ars_eastern_usa_scholarship.htm (http://www.scholarships4students.com/ars_eastern_usa_scholarship.htm)) that aid solely white people at the expense of people of color that you seem to be ignoring completely.

Also, while you're at it, please try to respond to my question (third time I've asked, now) about any actual proof you have that the IP discriminates against white inmates vis a vis inmates of color. Any stats you come up with will of course have to be considered in light of differential imprisonment rates, differential wrongful conviction rates, etc.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 07, 2008, 02:14:58 PM
Seriously: every time you continue to deny the existence or significance of white privilege as a major component of institutional racism and discrimination, you are disregarding the struggle of non-whites. I'll leave it at that. If you seriously don't see that...yeah. I don't know, at this point. If you're so invested in looking at your own belly button and feeling bad for yourself, it's unclear to me that you can really be a partner in the struggle against racism.
I don't care, dashrashi.  I'm a little bit more concerned about what the conditions on the street are like for people living in poverty - black, white, NA, asian, middle eastern, etc. etc. etc. than I am in being your partner in some ideological agenda.

I can recognize that racism is a vast problem without discounting the other problems in our society that are equally pervasive and damaging.

Why the hell would I want to be your partner? Your approval is not a necessary element in my fight for social justice. You talk big talk about racism, while I spend thousands of hours trying to exonerate minorities who have been victimized by the criminal justice system. Unlike you, though, I am willing to recognize that the mentally-impaired white guy in Texas who was wrongfully convicted on a multiple-homicide because he was coerced into a confession (though he wasn't even in the city where the crime took place at the time) has also had his civil rights badly violated, and is not the recipient of your phantom "privilege." And I am willing to defend his rights to my dying day no matter whether or not you or the NAACP, the ACLU, the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Innocence Project are willing to go to bat for him - just because he is WHITE.

I also like how you get offended when I mention your pedigree in conversation, but are more than willing to throw mine back in my face. Go @#!* yourself. I am done humoring your bull.


Dude, here's the thing that I was hinting at earlier.

You can admit to "white privilege" without admitting that no whites have it tough.  Even those whites whose lives are bad and oppressed (and there are many of them) still benefit from this privilege, even though it's not worth much.  But it's worth a lot to the black family in the same SES group which gets to feel just a little more denigrated than that poor white family.  Just a little less human.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 02:16:19 PM



Dude, here's the thing that I was hinting at earlier.

You can admit to "white privilege" without admitting that no whites have it tough.  Even those whites whose lives are bad and oppressed (and there are many of them) still benefit from this privilege, even though it's not worth much.  But it's worth a lot to the black family in the same SES group which gets to feel just a little more denigrated than that poor white family.  Just a little less human.


I've said that 3 times now, and he hasn't acknowledged it yet.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 07, 2008, 02:17:01 PM
I grew up in mobile home in Southeastern Kentucky within a stones throw of a coal mine.  My mother and father have had to absolutely kill themselves just provide what little we have.  During college I worked two jobs in order to keep the rent paid.  One of my best friends and current roomate, whom I met during my freshman year, is black.  His mother is a judge, and his father is a financial analyst.  Let it suffice that my family's entire living quarters could probably fit into his living room. Although he had no real interest in law, his family placed a considerable amount of pressure on him to pursue a career in law.  We applied to many of the same schools because we felt that it would be nice if we could attend law school together.  Despite having a 6 point lower LSAT score and a 4 point lower GPA he was accepted to all three of our top choices and I was denied. 

AA is bull and you would be hard pressed to convince me otherwise.   

Oh look, another hard-lifer.

This board is full of them!

How queer it is that every white person here suffered so much...


That is kind of the point of what we are saying.  There are many many white people that have it just as bad off as the minorities you are talking about


This isn't being denied.  What's being reinforced is this:

1.  Proportionally, way more minorities have it this bad than vice versa.
2.  This outlier situation where a rich black person takes a poor white person's spot is extremely rare.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 02:18:10 PM



Dude, here's the thing that I was hinting at earlier.

You can admit to "white privilege" without admitting that no whites have it tough.  Even those whites whose lives are bad and oppressed (and there are many of them) still benefit from this privilege, even though it's not worth much.  But it's worth a lot to the black family in the same SES group which gets to feel just a little more denigrated than that poor white family.  Just a little less human.


I've said that 3 times now, and he hasn't acknowledged it yet.

*&^%, check out my last few pages of posts. Interspersed with some speculation as to his mental health, I feel like this is all I've been saying.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 07, 2008, 02:19:01 PM
Seriously: every time you continue to deny the existence or significance of white privilege as a major component of institutional racism and discrimination, you are disregarding the struggle of non-whites. I'll leave it at that. If you seriously don't see that...yeah. I don't know, at this point. If you're so invested in looking at your own belly button and feeling bad for yourself, it's unclear to me that you can really be a partner in the struggle against racism.


And as long as you pretend that poor white people are better off than middle class minorities and therefore the middle class minorities need the help of affirmative action at the expense of the poor white people you will be fighting against equality of opportunity.


::SMH::

Why do people have to create these binaries?  These things aren't pitted at the poles!
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 02:26:30 PM
Cady, your post is a good one. Let me break it down, so maybe you can understand where I am coming from:

Quote
Saying that there is white privilege != all white people are privileged in the sense that those here who just can't see it (primarily bearly, but I think there are others) seem to think. Bearly, you've taken issue with someone apparently saying that all white people start on third base? I'm not going to go back and look for it. Okay. Depending on how you interpret that, I can see how you might take issue with it. That's fine. Let's set aside that for the moment and consider what white privilege actually is.
I can't really set that aside. I have conceded the concept of white people as a macro demographic group enjoying certain privileges over URMs. But those macro advantages do not transfer to the lives of individual people who are living in poverty, and thus not actually benefitting from the privilege. Privilege is defined (in regards to this debate) as:

A special advantage, immunity, permission, right, or benefit granted to or enjoyed by an individual, class, or caste.

Now if millions of white people exist who do not actually enjoy the advantages, immunities, permissions, rights, or benefits of our social system, the claim that they are privileged is by definition inapplicable to them, and therefore wrong.


Quote
First allow me to say that, really and truly, I understand that race is not a black and white (heh) issue. I'm not attempting to simplify it into that, pigeon-hole people, etc. I'm also not trying to suggest that race is the only thing that matters. Acknowledging that it does matter is not the same as saying that it is the only thing that matters. Certainly, when you attempt to explain a concept such as white privilege, it is easier to explain the concept without the use of extensive modifiers to say "but if you're a white person with that experience, then maybe it will be more like this...or maybe that other thing isn't something you experience the same way Bobby MillionaireHeir does." That doesn't mean that the person explaining/defending it doesn't understand that it is complicated, or doesn't expect the person that they are speaking to to understand that as well. Finally, the checklist that was posted is not the ultimate, be-all end-all authority on white privilege, and its existence does not need to imply that all white people have experienced everything on that list in the same way in some universal "white person" experience. It is an indication of the kinds of ways that our society often privileges white people.
These are all ideas that I both understand and concede. Again, my problem is not with the idea of macro-level white privilege. My problem specifically is with the idea that such privilege is actually enjoyed by all individual whites. I hope you can make the distinction here. For more information, and perhaps a clarification of my position, I direct you to my post here: http://www.lawschooldiscussion.org/prelaw/index.php/topic,104083.140.html

Quote
If you want to argue about how white privilege should factor into the policy decisions we make, that's perfectly fine. I may disagree with you, and I may not. Iím probably not going to get up on a soap box and argue that white privilege means that AA is the best idea we ever had. Other people might, and, you know, if thatís what they think, thatís their right. But what I'm concerned about here is the continued denial that white privilege does operate, seemingly primarily supported by contentions that some white people have really hard lives and some black people have really awesome lives, that sometimes some black people get things some white people don't, that there are some black people whose lives you would rather have than your own. White privilege doesn't say that this isn't so, or that this isn't possible. It doesn't say that it doesn't suck to be a poor white person, too. It doesn't say that there aren't other forms of discrimination than racism and/or bias against non-white people, and it doesn't say that our identities and experiences aren't complicated. It doesn't say that the privileges that accompany being white necessarily trump any other detriments or trials a white person might face in some cosmic tally.
This is a beautifully constructed and well stated paragraph - I agree with almost everything therein. But it ignores the fact that white people who do not actually live in mainstream society, and cannot dig their way out of the ghetto do not in any way benefit from "white" privilege. Again, I want to reiterate this - Just because blacks are subject to a distinct racial DISadvantage, does not mean that all whites, regardless of class, are able to benefit from any racial advantage.

Quote
What white privilege does mean is that there is a set of psychological, pecuniary, interpersonal, etc. benefits that are available to white people because they are white.
In order to be deemed a "privileged" person, I believe that an individual actually has to benefit from the presumed privilege.


Quote
It doesn't mean that all of those potential benefits are actualized in every white person's life, but that they are available, and that it would be pretty f-ing challenging to find a white person who hasn't benefited in some way from being white, even if that doesn't mean that they're rich and highly educated and have a nice car and a big house and a cushy life.
Your lack of interaction and empathy for the millions of white people who haven't benefited from these supposed benefits is exactly the sort of thing that keeps me motivated to continue this debate.

Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 02:27:03 PM



Dude, here's the thing that I was hinting at earlier.

You can admit to "white privilege" without admitting that no whites have it tough.  Even those whites whose lives are bad and oppressed (and there are many of them) still benefit from this privilege, even though it's not worth much.  But it's worth a lot to the black family in the same SES group which gets to feel just a little more denigrated than that poor white family.  Just a little less human.


I've said that 3 times now, and he hasn't acknowledged it yet.

*&^%, check out my last few pages of posts. Interspersed with some speculation as to his mental health, I feel like this is all I've been saying.

well, who would listen to you? your life is easy. you go to Harvard.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 02:29:38 PM


Quote
It doesn't mean that all of those potential benefits are actualized in every white person's life, but that they are available, and that it would be pretty f-ing challenging to find a white person who hasn't benefited in some way from being white, even if that doesn't mean that they're rich and highly educated and have a nice car and a big house and a cushy life.
Your lack of interaction and empathy for the millions of white people who haven't benefited from these supposed benefits is exactly the sort of thing that keeps me motivated to continue this debate.



I was going to respond until this.

I'm taking a page out of your very own playbook here: @#!* you, bearly.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: filet o' fish on April 07, 2008, 02:36:22 PM
 :o

Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 02:36:57 PM
Do yourself a favor, argumentation-wise. Do not describe again all the wonderful institutions black folks have to take advantage of without something more concrete to back you up, e.g. statistics about how useful those institutions are, what proportion of underprivileged people of color directly benefit from their very resource-limited activities, etc. Also, please consider that those institutions were founded precisely to try and even out the disparity between same-SES whites and non-whites (some would call this disparity a result of white privilege), and that you haven't offered any concrete evidence to show that they've even remotely come close to accomplishing this mission. Furthermore, consider that there are other institutions (e.g. nationality-limited scholarships, see one example here: http://www.scholarships4students.com/ars_eastern_usa_scholarship.htm (http://www.scholarships4students.com/ars_eastern_usa_scholarship.htm)) that aid solely white people at the expense of people of color that you seem to be ignoring completely.

Also, while you're at it, please try to respond to my question (third time I've asked, now) about any actual proof you have that the IP discriminates against white inmates vis a vis inmates of color. Any stats you come up with will of course have to be considered in light of differential imprisonment rates, differential wrongful conviction rates, etc.
Do you have any actual proof that businesspeople discriminate on the basis of race because blue jeans are not acceptable business apparel? If you are allowed to make wild conjectured statements, I am allowed to surmise that limited organizational resources are much more likely to be spent on individuals who have a tremendous civil rights support system rather than ones who are completely ignored by society and considered "privileged." It's not that much of a logical jump.

Further, I don't need to provide you with any empirical data about the success rate of the thousands of organizations and laws that are designed to benefit poor African Americans:

1) Because you don't provide empirical data for anything you say, so eat me.
and
2) Because regardless of success rate, these organizations and laws DO exist. Even if their success rate is 1%, that is a 1% higher amount of support that individual poor black people do than individual poor middle-easterners, asians, whites, and Native Americans.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: filet o' fish on April 07, 2008, 02:39:15 PM
Oh, lol @ "I don't have to prove anything because you haven't."

Be the bigger person here. Or rather, quid pro quo. Whatever.

Also, lol @ there being no programs or scholarships for Native Americans. Sure, there could always be more, but I think that claim is a bit disingenuous to the topic at hand.

But you seem to do well with the disingenuous part.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 02:40:31 PM
Seriously: every time you continue to deny the existence or significance of white privilege as a major component of institutional racism and discrimination, you are disregarding the struggle of non-whites. I'll leave it at that. If you seriously don't see that...yeah. I don't know, at this point. If you're so invested in looking at your own belly button and feeling bad for yourself, it's unclear to me that you can really be a partner in the struggle against racism.
I don't care, dashrashi.  I'm a little bit more concerned about what the conditions on the street are like for people living in poverty - black, white, NA, asian, middle eastern, etc. etc. etc. than I am in being your partner in some ideological agenda.

I can recognize that racism is a vast problem without discounting the other problems in our society that are equally pervasive and damaging.

Why the hell would I want to be your partner? Your approval is not a necessary element in my fight for social justice. You talk big talk about racism, while I spend thousands of hours trying to exonerate minorities who have been victimized by the criminal justice system. Unlike you, though, I am willing to recognize that the mentally-impaired white guy in Texas who was wrongfully convicted on a multiple-homicide because he was coerced into a confession (though he wasn't even in the city where the crime took place at the time) has also had his civil rights badly violated, and is not the recipient of your phantom "privilege." And I am willing to defend his rights to my dying day no matter whether or not you or the NAACP, the ACLU, the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Innocence Project are willing to go to bat for him - just because he is WHITE.

I also like how you get offended when I mention your pedigree in conversation, but are more than willing to throw mine back in my face. Go @#!* yourself. I am done humoring your bull.


Dude, here's the thing that I was hinting at earlier.

You can admit to "white privilege" without admitting that no whites have it tough.  Even those whites whose lives are bad and oppressed (and there are many of them) still benefit from this privilege, even though it's not worth much.  But it's worth a lot to the black family in the same SES group which gets to feel just a little more denigrated than that poor white family.  Just a little less human.

I see where you are coming from, Hairless, but again, I respectfully disagree. On the macro level, as I said, white privilege does exist, but that's little help to the disadvantaged individuals who do not have the means to actually benefit from it. These whites are by definition NOT privileged.

Maintaining that "whites are privileged" undercuts the legitimate claims of these overlooked social groups that they, too, are in dire need of assistance.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 02:43:59 PM
Oh, lol @ "I don't have to prove anything because you haven't."

Be the bigger person here. Or rather, quid pro quo. Whatever.
I have. See point 2.

Quote
Also, lol @ there being no programs or scholarships for Native Americans. Sure, there could always be more, but I think that claim is a bit disingenuous to the topic at hand.
There are, but not nearly the social support that African Americans have. African Americans are the single most politically active minority group in the US, and have significant political, economic and educational resources that poor natives simply do not. The NAACP, the Negro College Fund, etc. are uniquely powerful resources that other minorities just do not have access to.

Quote
But you seem to do well with the disingenuous part.
Be the bigger person here.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: filet o' fish on April 07, 2008, 02:44:38 PM
How do you propose we deal with macro-level problems and policies in a way that doesn't @#!* over individuals, or on the micro level?

I don't think anyone here disagrees with your idealism, but rather find it a little naive, or perhaps absolutely impractical, and certainly disingenuous to the discussion at hand.

In other words, what's your hang up on this point, especially as it relates to my first question. 
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 07, 2008, 02:44:54 PM
Bear, here's where I see you and (Cady, dash, I, others) are not quite matching up: I don't think we're defining "privilege" in the same way, and I don't think we're comparing the same things.

1.  For you, "privilege" is tangible and powerful.  For us, "privilege" is subtle and insidious. 
2.  We're comparing SES with SES.  You're comparing SES to the norm.  I think perhaps both have merit, but we have to be talking about the same thing to be able to disagree about those same things.


As to 1, you can see it's not a total binary.  Each can play into the other without defeating it.  Nor does it mean that all people receive privilege all the time.  Nor does it mean that "privilege" necessarily equals "access to wealth" or something similar.

As to 2, our argument is basically this: if you have a poor white person and you have a similarly poor black person, that white person has benefits, however small, that that black person will never have.  That white person has a better chance of getting loans at a bank, of having a wealthier relative or friend who can co-sign for things or who can help out in tough times, of not ending up jail for small transgressions, of not being harassed to buy drugs on the street by people who exert a powerful influence over his or her life, of not being gawked or frowned at when they go eat at the local restaurant, of not feeling like an outsider because they stand out like a sore thumb in a crowd.  This does not mean that this single white person will always benefit this way.  This does not mean that this single white person's life is all that great, or that they don't get discriminated against at all -- certainly, poverty has its own numerous active stereotypes.  This does not mean that there aren't "injustices" for this poor person that tilt the other way: AA entrance into school, or other government-subsidized minority programs.  It just means that, proportionally, the benefits allotted to this white person are greater than those allotted to this black person, precisely because of their race.  It means that, on average, this white person is going to have more chances (no matter how hard government programs try to rectify this situation).  This doesn't mean, however, that such a "privilege" is going to mean much in anyone's life in a positive sense.  It might, however, affect the other party negatively, knowing that they're considered just a little less human than their low-SES comrade.  ::uses Commie language for effect::


I just don't think your argument needs to exclude ours.  They co-exist just fine.  You're not letting any poor, oppressed white people down by admitting that even when they are oppressed, "white privilege" is still at work in their lives.  Why?  Because "white privilege" isn't a powerful, tangible benefit for this person.  It's defined from the Other's eyes.  It's for that black guy whose life is just as bad and oppressed, only just a little more so.  But even then, that black guy is thinking, "Man, that white guy has it rough."  Because they both do.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 02:46:17 PM


Quote
It doesn't mean that all of those potential benefits are actualized in every white person's life, but that they are available, and that it would be pretty f-ing challenging to find a white person who hasn't benefited in some way from being white, even if that doesn't mean that they're rich and highly educated and have a nice car and a big house and a cushy life.
Your lack of interaction and empathy for the millions of white people who haven't benefited from these supposed benefits is exactly the sort of thing that keeps me motivated to continue this debate.



I was going to respond until this.

I'm taking a page out of your very own playbook here: @#!* you, bearly.
Go for it. Dash took it to this level many pages ago, I think we can all run with it.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 02:48:34 PM
Do yourself a favor, argumentation-wise. Do not describe again all the wonderful institutions black folks have to take advantage of without something more concrete to back you up, e.g. statistics about how useful those institutions are, what proportion of underprivileged people of color directly benefit from their very resource-limited activities, etc. Also, please consider that those institutions were founded precisely to try and even out the disparity between same-SES whites and non-whites (some would call this disparity a result of white privilege), and that you haven't offered any concrete evidence to show that they've even remotely come close to accomplishing this mission. Furthermore, consider that there are other institutions (e.g. nationality-limited scholarships, see one example here: http://www.scholarships4students.com/ars_eastern_usa_scholarship.htm (http://www.scholarships4students.com/ars_eastern_usa_scholarship.htm)) that aid solely white people at the expense of people of color that you seem to be ignoring completely.

Also, while you're at it, please try to respond to my question (third time I've asked, now) about any actual proof you have that the IP discriminates against white inmates vis a vis inmates of color. Any stats you come up with will of course have to be considered in light of differential imprisonment rates, differential wrongful conviction rates, etc.
Do you have any actual proof that businesspeople discriminate on the basis of race because blue jeans are not acceptable business apparel? If you are allowed to make wild conjectured statements, I am allowed to surmise that limited organizational resources are much more likely to be spent on individuals who have a tremendous civil rights support system rather than ones who are completely ignored by society and considered "privileged." It's not that much of a logical jump.

Further, I don't need to provide you with any empirical data about the success rate of the thousands of organizations and laws that are designed to benefit poor African Americans:

1) Because you don't provide empirical data for anything you say, so eat me.
and
2) Because regardless of success rate, these organizations and laws DO exist. Even if their success rate is 1%, that is a 1% higher amount of support that individual poor black people do than individual poor middle-easterners, asians, whites, and Native Americans.

What in the everloving @#!* are you talking about? Businesspeople are expected to dress in suits; I merely posited that I don't think it's an accident that the suit derived from white/Anglo culture, and that we currently consider it to be the height of respectable/acceptable fashion, and MOREOVER, that it's also not an accident that we consider basketball shorts unrespectable/unacceptable fashion, whereas a different, more-associated-with-white-people kind of shorts (hideous J Crew bermudas) are more respectable.

So you've proven that you can't read. Which is awesome for you, I'd wager.

And it's interesting to me that you think that believing in "white privilege" is the majority position. Maybe it's you who needs to get out into the real world. Maybe then you'll stop feeling so f-ing oppressed. POOR YOU.

Further, it is seriously gross of you to tell me to "eat [you]." Not to mention wildly immature, and painfully, painfully stupid.

Not to mention, by the by, that you are unable to provide any support whatsoever when pressed about what is honestly a ludicrous and offensive assertion, even when such support could probably be easily obtained by someone with your knowledge of an organization like IP. Whereas I immediately countered your assertion about institutions designed to help people of color, and how the poor whites are left out in the cold with an institution designed to help a certain subset of white people, at the expense of non-whites. Which takes us to our next point:

And of course, you didn't respond to my assertion that you were ignoring certain institutions set up to advantage whites as against non-whites, eg the Armenian scholarship I found in under 30 seconds on Google.

Why not? I can only assume that we're back to the "can't read" thing.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 02:48:54 PM


Quote
It doesn't mean that all of those potential benefits are actualized in every white person's life, but that they are available, and that it would be pretty f-ing challenging to find a white person who hasn't benefited in some way from being white, even if that doesn't mean that they're rich and highly educated and have a nice car and a big house and a cushy life.
Your lack of interaction and empathy for the millions of white people who haven't benefited from these supposed benefits is exactly the sort of thing that keeps me motivated to continue this debate.



I was going to respond until this.

I'm taking a page out of your very own playbook here: @#!* you, bearly.
Go for it. Dash took it to this level many pages ago, I think we can all run with it.

OH NOES I HURT HIS FEELINGS.

eta: whatever, you're seriously a joke.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: filet o' fish on April 07, 2008, 02:49:11 PM
Oh, lol @ "I don't have to prove anything because you haven't."

Be the bigger person here. Or rather, quid pro quo. Whatever.
I have. See point 2.

I'm slow. Explain how point 2 substantiates or provides evidence for anything.

Cite something.

Quote
Also, lol @ there being no programs or scholarships for Native Americans. Sure, there could always be more, but I think that claim is a bit disingenuous to the topic at hand.
There are, but not nearly the social support that African Americans have. African Americans are the single most politically active minority group in the US, and have significant political, economic and educational resources that poor natives simply do not. The NAACP, the Negro College Fund, etc. are uniquely powerful resources that other minorities just do not have access to.

I don't disagree here.

I still you're tossing up a big, stinky red herring.

Quote
But you seem to do well with the disingenuous part.
Be the bigger person here.

I can't - I'm a troll.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 07, 2008, 02:49:37 PM
Maintaining that "whites are privileged" undercuts the legitimate claims of these overlooked social groups that they, too, are in dire need of assistance.


Exactly.  This is the strawman at play.  It's not "whites are privileged" in the sense that every white person gets something nice from society.  It's "whites are privileged" in the sense that, for two groups who are both in dire need of assistance, one's going to have it just a little shittier than the other, and somehow, it's always the non-white group.

Note, though: both groups are having it bad.  Both groups may be so beyond help that it's maddening. 
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 02:51:57 PM
You guys are talking about two different things here. Under privileged and under represented are not the same thing. AA exists as an attempt to make up for years of institutionalized under representation by minorities in the legal field. Be that either because by law for a long period of the profession they were not allowed to work in it, or because of more recent latent, but illegal racism. Its about helping those that under represented NOT about helping those that are under privileged. Its not to change them from under privileged to privileged. Its to get them better represented in the field be that as public interest lawyers, PDís, legal aid or big firm partners. So long as you equate AA with making blacks ďricherĒ:at the expense of poor whites youíre not looking at under representation, youíre looking at under privileged as the goal of AA. Its not the goal or the purpose. So it does not matter if a middle class black benfits, so long as he is still under represented in the field of law, AA is working.

There are plenty of under privileged white, yellow and brown people, but AA is not about helping them get more opportunities to make more money. They are not under represented as group, there are a lot of poor people. The vast majority of middle class Americans started out poor when they first came to this country. The American way is make yourself better off than your parents, not to have the government do it for you just becuse your poor. The difference is that for minorities they were not only poor but ALSO faced institutionalized barriers against them picking themselves up by their boot straps and moving into the next higher class. Under privileged and underrepresented are not one in the same thing, one is the point of AA the other is not. You can be white in this country AND be under privileged, but youíre not under represented, but you can be both if youíre a minority.

Agreed. 100%. The privilege discussion came about from an offensive digression from a poster who claimed that "all white people start of on third base". Again, I support AA and I susport equal representation in the legal (and all other) professional fields - but I controvert the concept of white privilege being broadly attributed to all individual white people regardless of socio-economic status.

White privilege exists in that any given underprivileged white person has the same potential to eventually become the CEO of some future 100 company as any other given underprivileged white person. They face the same obstacles in reaching that goal based on starting out as underprivileged. There are no inherent barriers based on race, only on class for the white person. A minority underprivileged person would face the same barriers as a white underprivileged person based on class with the added barrier of race and historic under representation and bias towards them. The white person, even though poor, is born into a society that does not add that second layer of obstacles upon them. White privilege, at least as I see it, means I donít have to fight two uphill battles, class and race, to get to the top if I'm white.
I disagree 100%. An underprivileged white person in this society does not have access to any of the institutional enablers that have vastly improved the economic position of black people in the US over the last 50 years. They do not have AA, they do not have "black only" college loans, they do not get priority on government contracts due to minority status.

Though racism does persist, there is a much larger system in place today for an underprivileged black person to escape poverty than an underprivileged white person. The perpetuation of the myth of "white privilege" also widens this divide.
Quote
These institutions exist and persist precisely because they did not used to be there. Less than 50 years ago, ALL education loans were white only. The vast majority of colleges and universities where white only and the vast majority of business were owned by white people. So ALL of the contracts and advantages went to white people.
If you can legitimately explain to me how the injustices perpetuated 50 years ago specifically advantage an individual penniless Iraqi refugee living in the South Bronx today, I will quit maintaining my position. I will also eat my hat.

Quote
You need to get past this idea of ďfairnessĒ, AA is not supposed to be fair. Once you get to law school, you will find that the law is rarely ďfair.Ē We have AA, and blacks have self-support groups, precisely because the odds were once so stacked against them. AA is retroactive looking, as are most laws, making up for all the crap we did in the past.
Our form of government, representative democracy, means that we always create laws after the fact to fix our past screw ups. Its tough to get legislators to pass proactive laws that hurt specific groups, but easy for them to pass reactive laws that make up for things the public realizes we got wrong in the past.
Again, I support AA! What are you talking about?
Quote
The Clean Water Act was created because our water was so polluted, the Air Act because our air was so polluted, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (spelling?) after the Enron collapse. New laws will be created after the housing collapse. We fix things retroactively, not to prevent what already occurred, but to fix what we did wrong back them. We are a backward looking legal society. We try to fix now the things we screwed up in the past and passing laws to right those former wrongs, they are rarely fair to the people being regulated now, because those folks had all the advantages in the past.
Again, please explain to me how the individual poor white Iraqi refugee had these advantages in the past, and I will gladly eat my hat.

Quote
So AA is not fair for poor whites now, well itís not supposed to be ďfairĒ but it is more fair than when blacks by law could not go to college at all.
Great! This is yet another reason why I support AA!
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 02:52:40 PM


Quote
It doesn't mean that all of those potential benefits are actualized in every white person's life, but that they are available, and that it would be pretty f-ing challenging to find a white person who hasn't benefited in some way from being white, even if that doesn't mean that they're rich and highly educated and have a nice car and a big house and a cushy life.
Your lack of interaction and empathy for the millions of white people who haven't benefited from these supposed benefits is exactly the sort of thing that keeps me motivated to continue this debate.



I was going to respond until this.

I'm taking a page out of your very own playbook here: @#!* you, bearly.
Go for it. Dash took it to this level many pages ago, I think we can all run with it.

OH NOES I HURT HIS FEELINGS.

eta: whatever, you're seriously a joke.
My feelings aren't hurt, you worthless windbag. I stopped caring about your opinions long ago.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 02:54:15 PM


Quote
It doesn't mean that all of those potential benefits are actualized in every white person's life, but that they are available, and that it would be pretty f-ing challenging to find a white person who hasn't benefited in some way from being white, even if that doesn't mean that they're rich and highly educated and have a nice car and a big house and a cushy life.
Your lack of interaction and empathy for the millions of white people who haven't benefited from these supposed benefits is exactly the sort of thing that keeps me motivated to continue this debate.



I was going to respond until this.

I'm taking a page out of your very own playbook here: @#!* you, bearly.
Go for it. Dash took it to this level many pages ago, I think we can all run with it.

OH NOES I HURT HIS FEELINGS.

eta: whatever, you're seriously a joke.
My feelings aren't hurt, you worthless windbag. I stopped caring about your opinions long ago.

Nice alliteration, toolbox. Your fourth-grade language arts teacher is so, so proud of you.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 02:54:29 PM
Bear, here's where I see you and (Cady, dash, I, others) are not quite matching up: I don't think we're defining "privilege" in the same way, and I don't think we're comparing the same things.

1.  For you, "privilege" is tangible and powerful.  For us, "privilege" is subtle and insidious. 
2.  We're comparing SES with SES.  You're comparing SES to the norm.  I think perhaps both have merit, but we have to be talking about the same thing to be able to disagree about those same things.


As to 1, you can see it's not a total binary.  Each can play into the other without defeating it.  Nor does it mean that all people receive privilege all the time.  Nor does it mean that "privilege" necessarily equals "access to wealth" or something similar.

As to 2, our argument is basically this: if you have a poor white person and you have a similarly poor black person, that white person has benefits, however small, that that black person will never have.  That white person has a better chance of getting loans at a bank, of having a wealthier relative or friend who can co-sign for things or who can help out in tough times, of not ending up jail for small transgressions, of not being harassed to buy drugs on the street by people who exert a powerful influence over his or her life, of not being gawked or frowned at when they go eat at the local restaurant, of not feeling like an outsider because they stand out like a sore thumb in a crowd.  This does not mean that this single white person will always benefit this way.  This does not mean that this single white person's life is all that great, or that they don't get discriminated against at all -- certainly, poverty has its own numerous active stereotypes.  This does not mean that there aren't "injustices" for this poor person that tilt the other way: AA entrance into school, or other government-subsidized minority programs.  It just means that, proportionally, the benefits allotted to this white person are greater than those allotted to this black person, precisely because of their race.  It means that, on average, this white person is going to have more chances (no matter how hard government programs try to rectify this situation).  This doesn't mean, however, that such a "privilege" is going to mean much in anyone's life in a positive sense.  It might, however, affect the other party negatively, knowing that they're considered just a little less human than their low-SES comrade.  ::uses Commie language for effect::


I just don't think your argument needs to exclude ours.  They co-exist just fine.  You're not letting any poor, oppressed white people down by admitting that even when they are oppressed, "white privilege" is still at work in their lives.  Why?  Because "white privilege" isn't a powerful, tangible benefit for this person.  It's defined from the Other's eyes.  It's for that black guy whose life is just as bad and oppressed, only just a little more so.  But even then, that black guy is thinking, "Man, that white guy has it rough."  Because they both do.

This is a good post. I promise I will address it. Let me get some work done and I'll be back.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 02:56:07 PM


Quote
It doesn't mean that all of those potential benefits are actualized in every white person's life, but that they are available, and that it would be pretty f-ing challenging to find a white person who hasn't benefited in some way from being white, even if that doesn't mean that they're rich and highly educated and have a nice car and a big house and a cushy life.
Your lack of interaction and empathy for the millions of white people who haven't benefited from these supposed benefits is exactly the sort of thing that keeps me motivated to continue this debate.



I was going to respond until this.

I'm taking a page out of your very own playbook here: @#!* you, bearly.
Go for it. Dash took it to this level many pages ago, I think we can all run with it.

OH NOES I HURT HIS FEELINGS.

eta: whatever, you're seriously a joke.
My feelings aren't hurt, you worthless windbag. I stopped caring about your opinions long ago.

Nice alliteration, toolbox. Your fourth-grade language arts teacher is so, so proud of you.
::Yawn::
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 07, 2008, 02:56:15 PM
Whoa.  What was the Iraqi comment all about?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: saneac2 on April 07, 2008, 02:58:48 PM
I grew up in mobile home in Southeastern Kentucky within a stones throw of a coal mine.  My mother and father have had to absolutely kill themselves just provide what little we have.  During college I worked two jobs in order to keep the rent paid.  One of my best friends and current roomate, whom I met during my freshman year, is black.  His mother is a judge, and his father is a financial analyst.  Let it suffice that my family's entire living quarters could probably fit into his living room. Although he had no real interest in law, his family placed a considerable amount of pressure on him to pursue a career in law.  We applied to many of the same schools because we felt that it would be nice if we could attend law school together.  Despite having a 6 point lower LSAT score and a 4 point lower GPA he was accepted to all three of our top choices and I was denied. 

AA is bull and you would be hard pressed to convince me otherwise.   
But dood, unlike your wealthy African American friend, you are privileged! You belong to the mainstream culture! There are lots more white people on TV than black people. When you go into a 7-11, the clerk doesn't look at you susiciously. You can find bandaids that match your skin. As a lawyer you will be wearing lotsa suits, and didn't white guys invent suits?! I can go on and on. There is a whole checklist for why you are privileged (though the retarded suit thing isn't on it :( ), it's a couple of pages back. You should check it out and feel really guilty about what you just said!

Did you know that even the wealthiest black people face discrimination? I read this article about Robert Johnson, the first black billionaire, who was getting behind the wheel of his Mercedes Benz, and some racist old white lady ran out in an embarrassed huff. She assumed that he was the chauffer because he was black. That's REALLY screwed up - even Bob Johnson is discriminated against! I bet that never happens to you when you get into your Mercedes!  >:(

Why don't you just accept that you are privileged, go back to your double-wide and realize that you don't deserve to be treated like an equal human being because some other white doods who you have never met do the same thing to black people.

This may well be the most pitiful excuse for a reasoned argument that I have ever seen.  Your right, the 7-11 clerk doesn't eye me suspiciously.  He/She does however tend to have a nice little chuckle at the expense of my accent.  "I see your wearing shoes." / "So how long have your and your sister been married?" /  "Do they have running water down there now?"  You just now called my culture "mainstream" when it is anything but.  Everywhere I go I have to pay special attention to my word usage so as not to give off the impression that I am somehow inferior.  Do not be so naive to suppose that there are not damaging stereotypes associated with being white.  And yes I will go back to my singlewide content that you have done nothing to take away from the point that was made.  If anything, you have shown that there is a tendency for some minorities to get really defensive and in this case offensive when faced with factual circumstances that do not allign perfectly with their notion of "how things are".     
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 03:00:29 PM
I grew up in mobile home in Southeastern Kentucky within a stones throw of a coal mine.  My mother and father have had to absolutely kill themselves just provide what little we have.  During college I worked two jobs in order to keep the rent paid.  One of my best friends and current roomate, whom I met during my freshman year, is black.  His mother is a judge, and his father is a financial analyst.  Let it suffice that my family's entire living quarters could probably fit into his living room. Although he had no real interest in law, his family placed a considerable amount of pressure on him to pursue a career in law.  We applied to many of the same schools because we felt that it would be nice if we could attend law school together.  Despite having a 6 point lower LSAT score and a 4 point lower GPA he was accepted to all three of our top choices and I was denied. 

AA is bull and you would be hard pressed to convince me otherwise.   
But dood, unlike your wealthy African American friend, you are privileged! You belong to the mainstream culture! There are lots more white people on TV than black people. When you go into a 7-11, the clerk doesn't look at you susiciously. You can find bandaids that match your skin. As a lawyer you will be wearing lotsa suits, and didn't white guys invent suits?! I can go on and on. There is a whole checklist for why you are privileged (though the retarded suit thing isn't on it :( ), it's a couple of pages back. You should check it out and feel really guilty about what you just said!

Did you know that even the wealthiest black people face discrimination? I read this article about Robert Johnson, the first black billionaire, who was getting behind the wheel of his Mercedes Benz, and some racist old white lady ran out in an embarrassed huff. She assumed that he was the chauffer because he was black. That's REALLY screwed up - even Bob Johnson is discriminated against! I bet that never happens to you when you get into your Mercedes!  >:(

Why don't you just accept that you are privileged, go back to your double-wide and realize that you don't deserve to be treated like an equal human being because some other white doods who you have never met do the same thing to black people.

This may well be the most pitiful excuse for a reasoned argument that I have ever seen.  Your right, the 7-11 clerk doesn't eye me suspiciously.  He/She does however tend to have a nice little chuckle at the expense of my accent.  "I see your wearing shoes." / "So how long have your and your sister been married?" /  "Do they have running water down there now?"  You just now called my culture "mainstream" when it is anything but.  Everywhere I go I have to pay special attention to my word usage so as not to give off the impression that I am somehow inferior.  Do not be so naive to suppose that there are not damaging stereotypes associated with being white.  And yes I will go back to my singlewide content that you have done nothing to take away from the point that was made.  If anything, you have shown that there is a tendency for some minorities to get really defensive and in this case offensive when faced with factual circumstances that do not allign perfectly with their notion of "how things are".     
LOL... not to be mean to you, man, but... Irony. Read some of my posts and rethink my answer.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 07, 2008, 03:02:35 PM
I grew up in mobile home in Southeastern Kentucky within a stones throw of a coal mine.  My mother and father have had to absolutely kill themselves just provide what little we have.  During college I worked two jobs in order to keep the rent paid.  One of my best friends and current roomate, whom I met during my freshman year, is black.  His mother is a judge, and his father is a financial analyst.  Let it suffice that my family's entire living quarters could probably fit into his living room. Although he had no real interest in law, his family placed a considerable amount of pressure on him to pursue a career in law.  We applied to many of the same schools because we felt that it would be nice if we could attend law school together.  Despite having a 6 point lower LSAT score and a 4 point lower GPA he was accepted to all three of our top choices and I was denied. 

AA is bull and you would be hard pressed to convince me otherwise.   
But dood, unlike your wealthy African American friend, you are privileged! You belong to the mainstream culture! There are lots more white people on TV than black people. When you go into a 7-11, the clerk doesn't look at you susiciously. You can find bandaids that match your skin. As a lawyer you will be wearing lotsa suits, and didn't white guys invent suits?! I can go on and on. There is a whole checklist for why you are privileged (though the retarded suit thing isn't on it :( ), it's a couple of pages back. You should check it out and feel really guilty about what you just said!

Did you know that even the wealthiest black people face discrimination? I read this article about Robert Johnson, the first black billionaire, who was getting behind the wheel of his Mercedes Benz, and some racist old white lady ran out in an embarrassed huff. She assumed that he was the chauffer because he was black. That's REALLY screwed up - even Bob Johnson is discriminated against! I bet that never happens to you when you get into your Mercedes!  >:(

Why don't you just accept that you are privileged, go back to your double-wide and realize that you don't deserve to be treated like an equal human being because some other white doods who you have never met do the same thing to black people.

This may well be the most pitiful excuse for a reasoned argument that I have ever seen.  Your right, the 7-11 clerk doesn't eye me suspiciously.  He/She does however tend to have a nice little chuckle at the expense of my accent.  "I see your wearing shoes." / "So how long have your and your sister been married?" /  "Do they have running water down there now?"  You just now called my culture "mainstream" when it is anything but.  Everywhere I go I have to pay special attention to my word usage so as not to give off the impression that I am somehow inferior.  Do not be so naive to suppose that there are not damaging stereotypes associated with being white.  And yes I will go back to my singlewide content that you have done nothing to take away from the point that was made.  If anything, you have shown that there is a tendency for some minorities to get really defensive and in this case offensive when faced with factual circumstances that do not allign perfectly with their notion of "how things are".     


LLOLz!!!  :o


::feels bad for Bearly who was only trying to help, even the post was unwarranted::
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 03:03:50 PM
Whoa.  What was the Iraqi comment all about?

Most Iraqis in the US are demographically classified as "white". Another example why the concept of "white privilege" is overly simplistic and disregards some very real truths.

Feel free to replace the word "Iraqi" with Iranian, Kosovar, Slovak, Albanian, Serbian, Ukranian, Tajik, Turk, etc., etc., etc.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 03:04:23 PM
Whoa.  What was the Iraqi comment all about?


That's how he rolls. Make a good point? He'll construct a hypothetical white person who's had it rough! Don't you tell that hypothetical person he hasn't had it rough! "I wasn't--" HOW DARE YOU. YOU BIGOT.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 03:09:09 PM
Whoa.  What was the Iraqi comment all about?

Most Iraqis in the US are demographically classified as "white". Another example why the concept of "white privilege" is overly simplistic and disregards some very real truths.

Feel free to replace the word "Iraqi" with Iranian, Kosovar, Slovak, Albanian, Serbian, Ukranian, Tajik, Turk, etc., etc., etc.

White privilege is only overly simplistic if you misrepresent it to be so.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 03:10:18 PM
Whoa.  What was the Iraqi comment all about?


That's how he rolls. Make a good point? He'll construct a hypothetical white person who's had it rough! Don't you tell that hypothetical person he hasn't had it rough! "I wasn't--" HOW DARE YOU.
Right.

White refugees don't exist in the United States.

Quote
YOU BIGOT.
Exactly.

Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 03:15:36 PM
Whoa.  What was the Iraqi comment all about?

Most Iraqis in the US are demographically classified as "white". Another example why the concept of "white privilege" is overly simplistic and disregards some very real truths.

Feel free to replace the word "Iraqi" with Iranian, Kosovar, Slovak, Albanian, Serbian, Ukranian, Tajik, Turk, etc., etc., etc.

White privilege is only overly simplistic if you misrepresent it to be so.
There is no willful misrepresentation on my part. I am speaking in response to posts that claim again and again and again that all white people are privileged. In response, I give examples of white people who do not benefit from white privilege.

The macro definition of white privilege is something I have agreed to and maintained since the very beginning. "White people" in the macro sense are more are socially privileged compared to black people, but millions of "white individuals" are not. That's what I have been saying all along. If you disagree with that, I understand - but I will maintain that personal experience proves it correct.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 07, 2008, 03:16:04 PM
Whoa.  What was the Iraqi comment all about?

Most Iraqis in the US are demographically classified as "white". Another example why the concept of "white privilege" is overly simplistic and disregards some very real truths.

Feel free to replace the word "Iraqi" with Iranian, Kosovar, Slovak, Albanian, Serbian, Ukranian, Tajik, Turk, etc., etc., etc.


Dude, arbitrary government classification =/= "white privilege".  They have little to do with each other.  That's partly the point: white privilege doesn't work on paper (although, rarely, it might), it works out in the real world.  An Arabic person is going to suffer from the same effects I described in my previous post as a black person, although maybe in different ways.  Same goes for (many) Turks, which goes to show why it's so bizarre -- if you're a Turk with lighter skin, you may receive this subtle "privilege", whereas if you're a Turk with darker skin, you're going to fall on the other side of the coin.

Seriously, it only goes skin deep.  It really does.  That's the point of "white privilege" -- it's skin deep.  That doesn't mean that there aren't other powerful discriminatory forces at work that render disadvantages to these same groups that may also "benefit" from "white privilege".  Think what ESL/accent immediately conjures for many people in the mainstream when they meet a Ukranian.  This person can be discriminated against in one sphere and receive "white privilege" in another sphere at exactly the same time.  And they do.

"White privilege" does NOT mutually exclude other forms of discrimination.  That's why I made the key point earlier: it's defined from the Other's eyes.  And here, we're talking race, race, race -- like I said, it's skin deep.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: filet o' fish on April 07, 2008, 03:16:14 PM
I think the point Matthies made earlier (about under-represented v. under-privileged) is an appropriate one.

What are we still fighting about?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 03:16:57 PM
Whoa.  What was the Iraqi comment all about?


That's how he rolls. Make a good point? He'll construct a hypothetical white person who's had it rough! Don't you tell that hypothetical person he hasn't had it rough! "I wasn't--" HOW DARE YOU.
Right.

White refugees don't exist in the United States.

Quote
YOU BIGOT.
Exactly.



hahahahhahahahaha

Fine. If he isn't hypothetical, tell me what his name is and how to contact him. If you can't do that, then he's hypothetical, because you made him, and specifically him, up--regardless of the fact that there are white refugees in the US. Dumbass.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 03:19:28 PM
Whoa.  What was the Iraqi comment all about?

Most Iraqis in the US are demographically classified as "white". Another example why the concept of "white privilege" is overly simplistic and disregards some very real truths.

Feel free to replace the word "Iraqi" with Iranian, Kosovar, Slovak, Albanian, Serbian, Ukranian, Tajik, Turk, etc., etc., etc.


Dude, arbitrary government classification =/= "white privilege".  They have little to do with each other.  That's partly the point: white privilege doesn't work on paper (although, rarely, it might), it works out in the real world.  An Arabic person is going to suffer from the same effects I described in my previous post as a black person, although maybe in different ways.  Same goes for Turks.

Seriously, it only goes skin deep.  It really does.  That's the point of "white privilege" -- it's skin deep.  That doesn't mean that there aren't other powerful discriminatory forces at work that render disadvantages to these same groups that may also "benefit" from "white privilege".  Think what ESL/accent immediately conjures for many people in the mainstream when they meet a Ukranian.  This person can be discriminated against in one sphere and receive "white privilege" in another sphere at exactly the same time.  And they do.

"White privilege" does NOT mutually exclude other forms of discrimination.  That's why I made the key point earlier: it's defined from the Other's eyes.  And here, we're talking race, race, race -- like I said, it's skin deep.

Look, if race is defined by "other people's eyes", does that mean that in my neighborhood (80% black), I suffer from "black privilege"?

Plenty of black people look "white". Are they recipients of "white privilege"? I certainly don't think so... Correct me if I am wrong.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 03:20:12 PM
Whoa.  What was the Iraqi comment all about?

Most Iraqis in the US are demographically classified as "white". Another example why the concept of "white privilege" is overly simplistic and disregards some very real truths.

Feel free to replace the word "Iraqi" with Iranian, Kosovar, Slovak, Albanian, Serbian, Ukranian, Tajik, Turk, etc., etc., etc.

White privilege is only overly simplistic if you misrepresent it to be so.
There is no willful misrepresentation on my part. I am speaking in response to posts that claim again and again and again that all white people are privileged. In response, I give examples of white people who do not benefit from white privilege.

The macro definition of white privilege is something I have agreed to and maintained since the very beginning. "White people" in the macro sense are more are socially privileged compared to black people, but millions of "white individuals" are not. That's what I have been saying all along. If you disagree with that, I understand - but I will maintain that personal experience proves it correct.

and i will maintain that you are a deliberately obtuse douchefuck with no redeeming value who has no idea about my personal history or inclinations but saw fit to insinuate that I lack empathy or experience with what it means to be underprivileged.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 03:21:45 PM
Whoa.  What was the Iraqi comment all about?

Most Iraqis in the US are demographically classified as "white". Another example why the concept of "white privilege" is overly simplistic and disregards some very real truths.

Feel free to replace the word "Iraqi" with Iranian, Kosovar, Slovak, Albanian, Serbian, Ukranian, Tajik, Turk, etc., etc., etc.

White privilege is only overly simplistic if you misrepresent it to be so.
There is no willful misrepresentation on my part. I am speaking in response to posts that claim again and again and again that all white people are privileged. In response, I give examples of white people who do not benefit from white privilege.

The macro definition of white privilege is something I have agreed to and maintained since the very beginning. "White people" in the macro sense are more are socially privileged compared to black people, but millions of "white individuals" are not. That's what I have been saying all along. If you disagree with that, I understand - but I will maintain that personal experience proves it correct.

and i will maintain that you are a deliberately obtuse douchefuck with no redeeming value who has no idea about my personal history or inclinations but saw fit to insinuate that I lack empathy or experience with what it means to be underprivileged.

GTQ. Sorry. Couldn't help myself.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 03:25:10 PM
Whoa.  What was the Iraqi comment all about?


That's how he rolls. Make a good point? He'll construct a hypothetical white person who's had it rough! Don't you tell that hypothetical person he hasn't had it rough! "I wasn't--" HOW DARE YOU.
Right.

White refugees don't exist in the United States.

Quote
YOU BIGOT.
Exactly.



hahahahhahahahaha

Fine. If he isn't hypothetical, tell me what his name is and how to contact him. If you can't do that, then he's hypothetical, because you made him, and specifically him, up--regardless of the fact that there are white refugees in the US. Dumbass.
Hamid Muhammad. He lives in Jamaica, Queens. He washes floors in a corner deli there (I used to go there all the time when I lived there.) Very cool guy. He's as white as I am, and broker than sin. I suspect he lives in his torn-down minivan. He's trying to scrounge together some money so he can buy a private cab radio and start a business. You are welcome to walk down Jamaica Avenue and 110th street, you'll find him there every night.

Are you happy?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 03:26:06 PM
Whoa.  What was the Iraqi comment all about?

Most Iraqis in the US are demographically classified as "white". Another example why the concept of "white privilege" is overly simplistic and disregards some very real truths.

Feel free to replace the word "Iraqi" with Iranian, Kosovar, Slovak, Albanian, Serbian, Ukranian, Tajik, Turk, etc., etc., etc.

White privilege is only overly simplistic if you misrepresent it to be so.
There is no willful misrepresentation on my part. I am speaking in response to posts that claim again and again and again that all white people are privileged. In response, I give examples of white people who do not benefit from white privilege.

The macro definition of white privilege is something I have agreed to and maintained since the very beginning. "White people" in the macro sense are more are socially privileged compared to black people, but millions of "white individuals" are not. That's what I have been saying all along. If you disagree with that, I understand - but I will maintain that personal experience proves it correct.

and i will maintain that you are a deliberately obtuse douchefuck with no redeeming value who has no idea about my personal history or inclinations but saw fit to insinuate that I lack empathy or experience with what it means to be underprivileged.
I apologize about how that came across. It wasn't a good assumption on my part.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 03:29:12 PM
Whoa.  What was the Iraqi comment all about?


That's how he rolls. Make a good point? He'll construct a hypothetical white person who's had it rough! Don't you tell that hypothetical person he hasn't had it rough! "I wasn't--" HOW DARE YOU.
Right.

White refugees don't exist in the United States.

Quote
YOU BIGOT.
Exactly.



hahahahhahahahaha

Fine. If he isn't hypothetical, tell me what his name is and how to contact him. If you can't do that, then he's hypothetical, because you made him, and specifically him, up--regardless of the fact that there are white refugees in the US. Dumbass.
Hamid Muhammad. He lives in Jamaica, Queens. He washes floors in a corner deli there (I used to go there all the time when I lived there.) Very cool guy. He's as white as I am, and broker than sin. I suspect he lives in his torn-down minivan. He's trying to scrounge together some money so he can buy a private cab radio and start a business. You are welcome to walk down Jamaica Avenue and 110th street, you'll find him there every night.

Are you happy?

Sure thing. Let me revise:

"That's how he rolls. Make a good point? He'll pick out a random white person he knows of who's had it rough! Don't you tell that random person he hasn't had it rough! 'I wasn't--' HOW DARE YOU. YOU BIGOT."

The point holds. Wowzers. Imagine that.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 03:33:39 PM
Whoa.  What was the Iraqi comment all about?


That's how he rolls. Make a good point? He'll construct a hypothetical white person who's had it rough! Don't you tell that hypothetical person he hasn't had it rough! "I wasn't--" HOW DARE YOU.
Right.

White refugees don't exist in the United States.

Quote
YOU BIGOT.
Exactly.



hahahahhahahahaha

Fine. If he isn't hypothetical, tell me what his name is and how to contact him. If you can't do that, then he's hypothetical, because you made him, and specifically him, up--regardless of the fact that there are white refugees in the US. Dumbass.
Hamid Muhammad. He lives in Jamaica, Queens. He washes floors in a corner deli there (I used to go there all the time when I lived there.) Very cool guy. He's as white as I am, and broker than sin. I suspect he lives in his torn-down minivan. He's trying to scrounge together some money so he can buy a private cab radio and start a business. You are welcome to walk down Jamaica Avenue and 110th street, you'll find him there every night.

Are you happy?

Sure thing. Let me revise:

"That's how he rolls. Make a good point? He'll pick out a random white person he knows of who's had it rough! Don't you tell that random person he hasn't had it rough! 'I wasn't--' HOW DARE YOU."

The point holds. Wowzers. Imagine that.
Sure thing. Dashrashi claims that a significant problem of social inequity does not exist where it clearly does, denies the existence of people who suffer from said problem. When presented with actual individuals who suffer from said problem, makes inane post with no actual content.

You said it best:
Quote
YOU BIGOT.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 03:35:03 PM
I think the point Matthies made earlier (about under-represented v. under-privileged) is an appropriate one.

What are we still fighting about?
It is an appropriate one. The current debate is not about AA. I agree with AA policies. The debate is about the over-reaching concept of "white privilege".
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 03:38:08 PM
Are you out of your mind?

I'm honestly at a loss here.

Did you miss the part about how I'M NOT DENYING THAT SOME WHITE PEOPLE HAVE IT ROUGH? Because I'm really, honestly, quite sure I've said that more than a few times. And that makes me a bigot because...no, you know what, I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about this point. You've worked yourself into some kind of hysterical lather, editing and splicing quotes for "dramatic" effect, and, like I said, while I'm sure your language arts teacher appreciates the shout-out, it's really not doing much for your argument.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 03:39:49 PM
Are you f-ing KIDDING me, bearly?

This:
Quote
Sure thing. Dashrashi claims that a significant problem of social inequity does not exist where it clearly does, denies the existence of people who suffer from said problem.

is the most ridiculous statement I think I have ever seen.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 03:43:33 PM
Are you out of your mind?

I'm honestly at a loss here.

Did you miss the part about how I'M NOT DENYING THAT SOME WHITE PEOPLE HAVE IT ROUGH? Because I'm really, honestly, quite sure I've said that more than a few times. And that makes me a bigot because...no, you know what, I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about this point. You've worked yourself into some kind of hysterical lather, editing and splicing quotes for "dramatic" effect, and, like I said, while I'm sure your language arts teacher appreciates the shout-out, it's really not doing much for your argument.
I don't really care about your appreciation of either my argument or my linguistic skills (though your profanity-laden tirades haven't been much of an inspiration either - please see your own sig for further information).

What you are missing entirely is not that "SOME WHITE PEOPLE HAVE IT ROUGH", but that "some white people have is SO rough that they never benefit in any material, cultural, educational or social way from the 'white privilege' that you attribute to them", and are therefore, not recipients of any such privilege.

And I am obtuse? LOL.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 03:44:16 PM
Are you f-ing KIDDING me, bearly?

This:
Quote
Sure thing. Dashrashi claims that a significant problem of social inequity does not exist where it clearly does, denies the existence of people who suffer from said problem.

is the most ridiculous statement I think I have ever seen.
See her contention that the white Iraqi refugee who I know is made up.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 03:46:13 PM
Are you f-ing KIDDING me, bearly?

This:
Quote
Sure thing. Dashrashi claims that a significant problem of social inequity does not exist where it clearly does, denies the existence of people who suffer from said problem.

is the most ridiculous statement I think I have ever seen.
See her contention that white Iraqi refugees are made up.

that is not at all what she said

Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 03:46:43 PM
I edited my post, please see above.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: filet o' fish on April 07, 2008, 03:49:16 PM
I think the point Matthies made earlier (about under-represented v. under-privileged) is an appropriate one.

What are we still fighting about?
It is an appropriate one. The current debate is not about AA. I agree with AA policies. The debate is about the over-reaching concept of "white privilege".

Then please answer this:

How do you propose we deal with macro-level problems and policies in a way that doesn't @#!* over individuals, or on the micro level?

I don't think anyone here disagrees with your idealism, but rather find it a little naive, or perhaps absolutely impractical, and certainly disingenuous to the discussion at hand.

In other words, what's your hang up on this point, especially as it relates to my first question. 
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 03:51:06 PM
Are you out of your mind?

I'm honestly at a loss here.

Did you miss the part about how I'M NOT DENYING THAT SOME WHITE PEOPLE HAVE IT ROUGH? Because I'm really, honestly, quite sure I've said that more than a few times. And that makes me a bigot because...no, you know what, I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about this point. You've worked yourself into some kind of hysterical lather, editing and splicing quotes for "dramatic" effect, and, like I said, while I'm sure your language arts teacher appreciates the shout-out, it's really not doing much for your argument.
I'm don't really care about your appreciation of either my argument or my linguistic skills (though your profanity-laden tirades haven't been much of an inspiration either - please see your own sig for further information).

What you are missing entirely is not that "SOME WHITE PEOPLE HAVE IT ROUGH", but that "some white people have is SO rough that they never benefit in any material, cultural, educational or social way from the 'white privilege' that you attribute to them", and are therefore, not recipients of any privilege.

And I am obtuse? LOL.

Yeah, and I fundamentally disagree with the bolded, and I think that the reason you believe the bolded is because, as has been stated above, you are MISREPRESENTING what J/Cady/I mean when we say "white privilege." It's smaller than you think it is. So any day your mentally-challenged wrongfully-convicted white client didn't get followed in a 7-11, he benefited from white privilege. Are you seriously saying that that never happened to him? Why would you say that?

You still haven't responded to J's exceedingly nicely stated posts on this topic, due to "not having time," I believe. But you have time to call me a bigot. Shitbag.

As far as your Iraqi friend, it actually makes no difference to my point whether you made him up out of whole cloth or not. And I said as much in my revised post. At which point you were suddenly unable to understand my point about the irrelevancies in your argument, and retreated to calling it inane. And I'm not telling you that your argument sucks as your language arts teacher, or to help you. I'm telling you because I'm arguing with you, and if your argumentation sucks, then it means that you're losing. THAT, however, is a helpful tip from me to you.

OH FUCKEN NOES, he called me unclassy and unrefined. That so desperately hurts my feelings, you have no idea. Clearly saying such things about me really gets me in the gut; that's why I put it in my sig, obvi.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 03:51:18 PM
I edited my post, please see above.

I don't really care. At this point you're not only being obtuse, you're misrepresenting things all over the place, and it's pathetic.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 07, 2008, 03:52:23 PM
Whoa.  What was the Iraqi comment all about?

Most Iraqis in the US are demographically classified as "white". Another example why the concept of "white privilege" is overly simplistic and disregards some very real truths.

Feel free to replace the word "Iraqi" with Iranian, Kosovar, Slovak, Albanian, Serbian, Ukranian, Tajik, Turk, etc., etc., etc.


Dude, arbitrary government classification =/= "white privilege".  They have little to do with each other.  That's partly the point: white privilege doesn't work on paper (although, rarely, it might), it works out in the real world.  An Arabic person is going to suffer from the same effects I described in my previous post as a black person, although maybe in different ways.  Same goes for (many) Turks, which goes to show why it's so bizarre -- if you're a Turk with lighter skin, you may receive this subtle "privilege", whereas if you're a Turk with darker skin, you're going to fall on the other side of the coin.

Seriously, it only goes skin deep.  It really does.  That's the point of "white privilege" -- it's skin deep.
  That doesn't mean that there aren't other powerful discriminatory forces at work that render disadvantages to these same groups that may also "benefit" from "white privilege".  Think what ESL/accent immediately conjures for many people in the mainstream when they meet a Ukranian.  This person can be discriminated against in one sphere and receive "white privilege" in another sphere at exactly the same time.  And they do.

"White privilege" does NOT mutually exclude other forms of discrimination.  That's why I made the key point earlier: it's defined from the Other's eyes.  And here, we're talking race, race, race -- like I said, it's skin deep.


I think this is the central tenet of all this.  My husband and I are both NDNs, identify soley as such; he, however, easily "passes" for white.  He's the first person to admit that he benefits from white privilege, that despite our similar middle-class upbringings, his life was made considerably easier due to his looking more like his Danish ancestors than his Cherokee ones.  Frankly, there was a time when I tried to benefit as well, when I dyed my hair red, donned green contacts and bought stock in 50spf sunscreen.  Why would I ever do such a thing?  Why would I eschew my culture, my mother, my grandparents?  But to those of us who do not benefit from white privilege, its power is intensely compelling - we're schooled in it from the day we're born, and we recognize it implicitly, (though we're told time and time again, we're "just being overly sensitive."  ::))

Of course "ranking" occurs within whiteness.  But once confronting with "the Other", those differences seem to disappear, part and parcel of white privilege.  Not always, but usually.

I do want to say, however, that I feel that much of what Bearly has to say about class is being ignored by some (nota bene, not by HGP/J), though perhaps it's just been lost in the heat of the discussion.  This could/should be split into two threads, one on white privilege, the other on class.  Of course they overlap, but while we seem to talk a lot about poverty in regards to affirmative action here on LSD, we seldom talk about it in and of itself.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 03:56:35 PM
Whoa.  What was the Iraqi comment all about?

Most Iraqis in the US are demographically classified as "white". Another example why the concept of "white privilege" is overly simplistic and disregards some very real truths.

Feel free to replace the word "Iraqi" with Iranian, Kosovar, Slovak, Albanian, Serbian, Ukranian, Tajik, Turk, etc., etc., etc.


Dude, arbitrary government classification =/= "white privilege".  They have little to do with each other.  That's partly the point: white privilege doesn't work on paper (although, rarely, it might), it works out in the real world.  An Arabic person is going to suffer from the same effects I described in my previous post as a black person, although maybe in different ways.  Same goes for (many) Turks, which goes to show why it's so bizarre -- if you're a Turk with lighter skin, you may receive this subtle "privilege", whereas if you're a Turk with darker skin, you're going to fall on the other side of the coin.

Seriously, it only goes skin deep.  It really does.  That's the point of "white privilege" -- it's skin deep.
  That doesn't mean that there aren't other powerful discriminatory forces at work that render disadvantages to these same groups that may also "benefit" from "white privilege".  Think what ESL/accent immediately conjures for many people in the mainstream when they meet a Ukranian.  This person can be discriminated against in one sphere and receive "white privilege" in another sphere at exactly the same time.  And they do.

"White privilege" does NOT mutually exclude other forms of discrimination.  That's why I made the key point earlier: it's defined from the Other's eyes.  And here, we're talking race, race, race -- like I said, it's skin deep.


I think this is the central tenet of all this.  My husband and I are both NDNs, identify soley as such; he, however, easily "passes" for white.  He's the first person to admit that he benefits from white privilege, that despite our similar middle-class upbringings, his life was made considerably easier due to his looking more like his Danish ancestors than his Cherokee ones.  Frankly, there was a time when I tried to benefit as well, when I dyed my hair red, donned green contacts and bought stock in 50spf sunscreen.  Why would I ever do such a thing?  Why would I eschew my culture, my mother, my grandparents?  But to those of us who do not benefit from white privilege, it's power is intensely compelling - we're schooled in it from the day we're born, and we recognize it implicitly, (though we're told time and time again, we're "just being overly sensitive."  ::))

Of course "ranking" occurs within whiteness.  But once confronting with "the Other", those differences seem to disappear, part and parcel of white privilege.  Not always, but usually.

I do want to say, however, that I feel that much of what Bearly has to say about class is being ignored by some (nota bene, not by HGP), though perhaps it's just been lost in the heat of the discussion.  This could/should be split into two threads, one on white privilege, the other on class.  Of course they overlap, but while we seem to talk a lot about poverty in regards to affirmative action here on LSD, we seldom talk about it in and of itself.

For the record: class is obviously one of the foremost problems in America. But you do not fix it by denying that white privilege exists. And if you DO deny that white privilege exists, then you're not someone that's worth listening to about poverty, frankly, because of your inability to get the big picture that exists on both a macro and micro level.

Just as it's myopic to focus on race at the expense of class, it's equally myopic to focus on class at the expense of race. That's all I've ever been saying to Bearly.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: yoyodawg on April 07, 2008, 04:10:46 PM
I think that everyone here is getting their panties in a wad over nothing. Everyone in America has certain advantages and disadvantages. Its called life. Stop bitching about useless bull and start living it.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 04:11:13 PM
Ouch! I stubbed my toe! Again!

I'll handle these one at a time:

How do you propose we deal with macro-level problems and policies in a way that doesn't @#!* over individuals, or on the micro level?

I don't. I think it's ok for individuals to go through significant difficulty if the end result is a society that is more equal, and more opportunities are created for people who are suffering as a racial and ethnic group, and have been for the past 400+ years in this land. I think it's ok to take positions away from some white people if the end result will be that little black boys and girls will have doctors, lawyers, and other professionals to look up to.

It's not FAIR. But it's ok. Life is not fair.

But we shouldn't then turn around and justify these policies by claiming that the people who are being deprived of said positions are somehow "advantaged". It's ok to admit that we have a macro problem, and it is both urgent and pervasive enough that some individuals may have to suffer to resolve it.

In other words, what's your hang up on this point, especially as it relates to my first question.
I went into this a little bit above, but I will enumerate to clarify:

1) Calling poor "white" people privileged creates significant undue social resentment that only perpetuates many of the racial conflicts in this country.

2) Calling poor "white" people privileged due to America's history of institutional racism ignores the fact that many white people did not help to propagate said racism, and wrongly places blame for an awful atrocity on people who do not have culpability for said atrocity.

3) Calling poor "white" people privileged, and "black" people underprivileged places significant political pressure on lawmakers and charible organizations that create policies that wrongly discriminate on the basis of race, and further create undue social resentment and racial conflict.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 04:18:55 PM
Just as it's myopic to focus on race at the expense of class, it's equally myopic to focus on class at the expense of race. That's all I've ever been saying to Bearly.
If this is all you have been saying, then you have been reiterating my points. It's ok to admit that some white people are badly underprivileged, while at the same time understanding the necessity of AA to deal with the larger racial problem.

But no - according to you, they are ALL recipients of "white privilege". It's ok to make generalizations like this about poor people despite of class, so long as the racial agenda isn't somehow impeded by it.

And FWIW, I want to create a response when I have the time to digest all of TheJ's points. I think his response was excellent, and worthy of a well-reasoned dialogue.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 04:30:26 PM
Just as it's myopic to focus on race at the expense of class, it's equally myopic to focus on class at the expense of race. That's all I've ever been saying to Bearly.
If this is all you have been saying, then you have been reiterating my points. It's ok to admit that some white people are badly underprivileged, while at the same time understanding the necessity of AA to deal with the larger racial problem.

But no - according to you, they are ALL recipients of "white privilege". It's ok to make generalizations like this about poor people despite of class, so long as the racial agenda isn't somehow impeded by it.

So you're saying that your mentally-challenged white client has never had the experience of NOT being followed and/or looked at askance in a 7-11 or similar, when a similar-but-black person was either followed or looked askance at? To keep it to the irrelevantly micro level, as you prefer. That's all it takes in my book to be the recipient of white privilege. And THAT'S all I've been saying.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 04:35:15 PM
Just as it's myopic to focus on race at the expense of class, it's equally myopic to focus on class at the expense of race. That's all I've ever been saying to Bearly.
If this is all you have been saying, then you have been reiterating my points. It's ok to admit that some white people are badly underprivileged, while at the same time understanding the necessity of AA to deal with the larger racial problem.

But no - according to you, they are ALL recipients of "white privilege". It's ok to make generalizations like this about poor people despite of class, so long as the racial agenda isn't somehow impeded by it.

You have absolutely no understanding of what saying someone is the recipient of white privilege means, if you can honestly, in good faith, continue to make this assertion (and the ones that you make in the post directly above the one that I have quoted)

We come again to the issue that you clearly have no concept of what "privilege" means in this situation.

It does not mean that someone who is white is automatically privileged on the under to over privileged spectrum that some people use to generally indicate a person's overall status. There are a ridiculous number of white people who can be categorized as underprivileged in that sense (I should know - I have a background in social work. How do you feel about me now, bearly? I can talk about my poor rural uneducated aunts and uncles and cousins who work in factories and never even dreamed of going to college, if you want.)

AGAIN: It means that there are benefits to being white that may impact the way that one sees their self with respect to society, the way society sees them, and the kinds of opportunities that are open. That those benefits don't make up for other detriments doesn't mean that the benefits don't exist, it simply means that our society is screwed up in a lot of ways. That there are other factors that impact how society sees a person, how a person sees their self in relation to society, and the opportunities that are open doesn't mean that white privilege doesn't exist. Seriously. No one here has said "white privilege is the only/the most important factor in the lives of all people." Acknowledging that someone is the recipient of white privilege does nothing to denigrate their other struggles, unless someone is shortsighted enough to interpret the concept in that manner - and if that's the case, well, there are bigger problems there.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 07, 2008, 04:39:39 PM
Whoa.  What was the Iraqi comment all about?

Most Iraqis in the US are demographically classified as "white". Another example why the concept of "white privilege" is overly simplistic and disregards some very real truths.

Feel free to replace the word "Iraqi" with Iranian, Kosovar, Slovak, Albanian, Serbian, Ukranian, Tajik, Turk, etc., etc., etc.


Dude, arbitrary government classification =/= "white privilege".  They have little to do with each other.  That's partly the point: white privilege doesn't work on paper (although, rarely, it might), it works out in the real world.  An Arabic person is going to suffer from the same effects I described in my previous post as a black person, although maybe in different ways.  Same goes for (many) Turks, which goes to show why it's so bizarre -- if you're a Turk with lighter skin, you may receive this subtle "privilege", whereas if you're a Turk with darker skin, you're going to fall on the other side of the coin.

Seriously, it only goes skin deep.  It really does.  That's the point of "white privilege" -- it's skin deep.
  That doesn't mean that there aren't other powerful discriminatory forces at work that render disadvantages to these same groups that may also "benefit" from "white privilege".  Think what ESL/accent immediately conjures for many people in the mainstream when they meet a Ukranian.  This person can be discriminated against in one sphere and receive "white privilege" in another sphere at exactly the same time.  And they do.

"White privilege" does NOT mutually exclude other forms of discrimination.  That's why I made the key point earlier: it's defined from the Other's eyes.  And here, we're talking race, race, race -- like I said, it's skin deep.


I think this is the central tenet of all this.  My husband and I are both NDNs, identify soley as such; he, however, easily "passes" for white.  He's the first person to admit that he benefits from white privilege, that despite our similar middle-class upbringings, his life was made considerably easier due to his looking more like his Danish ancestors than his Cherokee ones.  Frankly, there was a time when I tried to benefit as well, when I dyed my hair red, donned green contacts and bought stock in 50spf sunscreen.  Why would I ever do such a thing?  Why would I eschew my culture, my mother, my grandparents?  But to those of us who do not benefit from white privilege, it's power is intensely compelling - we're schooled in it from the day we're born, and we recognize it implicitly, (though we're told time and time again, we're "just being overly sensitive."  ::))

Of course "ranking" occurs within whiteness.  But once confronting with "the Other", those differences seem to disappear, part and parcel of white privilege.  Not always, but usually.

I do want to say, however, that I feel that much of what Bearly has to say about class is being ignored by some (nota bene, not by HGP), though perhaps it's just been lost in the heat of the discussion.  This could/should be split into two threads, one on white privilege, the other on class.  Of course they overlap, but while we seem to talk a lot about poverty in regards to affirmative action here on LSD, we seldom talk about it in and of itself.

For the record: class is obviously one of the foremost problems in America. But you do not fix it by denying that white privilege exists. And if you DO deny that white privilege exists, then you're not someone that's worth listening to about poverty, frankly, because of your inability to get the big picture that exists on both a macro and micro level.

Just as it's myopic to focus on race at the expense of class, it's equally myopic to focus on class at the expense of race. That's all I've ever been saying to Bearly.

I actually think Bearly gets that (at least, I hear that as I've read all this.)  I think, however, that his personal story compels him to mount the "class" defense, because, frankly, it really isn't one we talk about here on LSD, and, well, it's personal.  Maybe I spent too much time under the tutelage of Marxists, but I accept that there is a large segment of academia which argues for the primacy of class over race and gender - it's not particularly my cup of tea, but there are compelling arguments which have been made for over a hundred years and I can recognize them as such, without feeling it impedes my personal crusade to vanquish white privilege and misogyny (tm).
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 04:48:08 PM
I actually think Bearly gets that (at least, I hear that as I've read all this.)  I think, however, that his personal story compels him to mount the "class" defense, because, frankly, it really isn't one we talk about here on LDS, and, well, it's personal.  Maybe I spent too much time under the tutelage of Marxists, but I accept that there is a large segment of academia which argues for the primacy of class over race and gender - it's not particularly my cup of tea, but there are compelling arguments which have been made for over a hundred years and I can recognize them as such, without feeling it impedes my personal crusade to vanquish white privilege and misogyny (tm).

Careful with that "his personal story" business. If you don't watch out, he might call you a worthless windbag. Or classless and unrefined. Or whatever else. He spills his business all over this corner of the internet, but gets upset when others are able to construct a narrative about his life and his philosophies. 

And I have trouble taking the POV of class-over-race-and-gender seriously if it oh, huh, jeez, how bout that, what are the odds, has the effect of propping up one's conception of oneself as a hardworking scrapper who succeeded against all odds etc etc. I'm sympathetic to it as an academic Marxist argument, don't get me wrong. But to me, it's very, very, very clear that that's not the direction he's coming from. When you are psychologically "accidentally, just-so-happens" propping yourself up like that and in the process saying some rather uninformed and obtuse things, all the while, wildly and sloppily lashing out at those who disagree...well, I'm not likely to find it compelling as arguments go.

Oh, and Bearly: if you don't like me relating your personal background to your politics, you have a multitude of options. One would be not to share so much on the internet. Another would be not to take transparently self-reassuring positions and then deny that aspect of them so fiercely that your opponents have no choice but to, you know, read the writing on the wall. I'm sure there are others. Use your imagination.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 04:50:36 PM
Just as it's myopic to focus on race at the expense of class, it's equally myopic to focus on class at the expense of race. That's all I've ever been saying to Bearly.
If this is all you have been saying, then you have been reiterating my points. It's ok to admit that some white people are badly underprivileged, while at the same time understanding the necessity of AA to deal with the larger racial problem.

But no - according to you, they are ALL recipients of "white privilege". It's ok to make generalizations like this about poor people despite of class, so long as the racial agenda isn't somehow impeded by it.

So you're saying that your mentally-challenged white client has never had the experience of NOT being followed and/or looked at askance in a 7-11 or similar, when a similar-but-black person was either followed or looked askance at? To keep it to the irrelevantly micro level, as you prefer. That's all it takes in my book to be the recipient of white privilege. And THAT'S all I've been saying.
I'm saying that when I was a teenager in bed-stuy and lefrak, I used to get followed around in the bodegas (no  7-11's in the hood.)

I'm not trying to say that OMG because of this I understand what it's like to be black in America - I will NEVER understand that. I never grew up in a family that was taken as slaves from our homeland, and forced to work here.

But I can say that my grandparents died in the holocaust, and I fled my country because my town was being overrun by WHITE right-wing fascists that threatened to kill my family because I belonged to a unique-looking ethnic minority (and have since killed my cousin whose family chose to remain there.) I think it's wrong to assume that all "white" people have not experienced racism. Just by lumping all of us in one racial group, demographers do us a significant racial disservice (Just as it would be wrong to say that all Hispanic Americans are "black", as they did in Texas early in this century.)

I support AA and other policies because I genuinely and personally empathize with the black, AA, and Hispanic communities for the racism that they face in this country to this day - but saying that white people do not get discriminated against flies in the face of hundreds of years of "white"-on-"white" crime, slavery, indentured servitude, war, and genocide. The bottom line is this - if I showed up in any exclusive country club or spa in this country, I too would be denied admission due to the way I look.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 04:53:33 PM
Whoa.  What was the Iraqi comment all about?

Most Iraqis in the US are demographically classified as "white". Another example why the concept of "white privilege" is overly simplistic and disregards some very real truths.

Feel free to replace the word "Iraqi" with Iranian, Kosovar, Slovak, Albanian, Serbian, Ukranian, Tajik, Turk, etc., etc., etc.


Dude, arbitrary government classification =/= "white privilege".  They have little to do with each other.  That's partly the point: white privilege doesn't work on paper (although, rarely, it might), it works out in the real world.  An Arabic person is going to suffer from the same effects I described in my previous post as a black person, although maybe in different ways.  Same goes for (many) Turks, which goes to show why it's so bizarre -- if you're a Turk with lighter skin, you may receive this subtle "privilege", whereas if you're a Turk with darker skin, you're going to fall on the other side of the coin.

Seriously, it only goes skin deep.  It really does.  That's the point of "white privilege" -- it's skin deep.
  That doesn't mean that there aren't other powerful discriminatory forces at work that render disadvantages to these same groups that may also "benefit" from "white privilege".  Think what ESL/accent immediately conjures for many people in the mainstream when they meet a Ukranian.  This person can be discriminated against in one sphere and receive "white privilege" in another sphere at exactly the same time.  And they do.

"White privilege" does NOT mutually exclude other forms of discrimination.  That's why I made the key point earlier: it's defined from the Other's eyes.  And here, we're talking race, race, race -- like I said, it's skin deep.


I think this is the central tenet of all this.  My husband and I are both NDNs, identify soley as such; he, however, easily "passes" for white.  He's the first person to admit that he benefits from white privilege, that despite our similar middle-class upbringings, his life was made considerably easier due to his looking more like his Danish ancestors than his Cherokee ones.  Frankly, there was a time when I tried to benefit as well, when I dyed my hair red, donned green contacts and bought stock in 50spf sunscreen.  Why would I ever do such a thing?  Why would I eschew my culture, my mother, my grandparents?  But to those of us who do not benefit from white privilege, it's power is intensely compelling - we're schooled in it from the day we're born, and we recognize it implicitly, (though we're told time and time again, we're "just being overly sensitive."  ::))

Of course "ranking" occurs within whiteness.  But once confronting with "the Other", those differences seem to disappear, part and parcel of white privilege.  Not always, but usually.

I do want to say, however, that I feel that much of what Bearly has to say about class is being ignored by some (nota bene, not by HGP), though perhaps it's just been lost in the heat of the discussion.  This could/should be split into two threads, one on white privilege, the other on class.  Of course they overlap, but while we seem to talk a lot about poverty in regards to affirmative action here on LSD, we seldom talk about it in and of itself.

For the record: class is obviously one of the foremost problems in America. But you do not fix it by denying that white privilege exists. And if you DO deny that white privilege exists, then you're not someone that's worth listening to about poverty, frankly, because of your inability to get the big picture that exists on both a macro and micro level.

Just as it's myopic to focus on race at the expense of class, it's equally myopic to focus on class at the expense of race. That's all I've ever been saying to Bearly.

I actually think Bearly gets that (at least, I hear that as I've read all this.)  I think, however, that his personal story compels him to mount the "class" defense, because, frankly, it really isn't one we talk about here on LSD, and, well, it's personal.  Maybe I spent too much time under the tutelage of Marxists, but I accept that there is a large segment of academia which argues for the primacy of class over race and gender - it's not particularly my cup of tea, but there are compelling arguments which have been made for over a hundred years and I can recognize them as such, without feeling it impedes my personal crusade to vanquish white privilege and misogyny (tm).
Thank you MBW. You have no clue how much I appreciate that.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 07, 2008, 04:59:43 PM
I actually think Bearly gets that (at least, I hear that as I've read all this.)  I think, however, that his personal story compels him to mount the "class" defense, because, frankly, it really isn't one we talk about here on LDS, and, well, it's personal.  Maybe I spent too much time under the tutelage of Marxists, but I accept that there is a large segment of academia which argues for the primacy of class over race and gender - it's not particularly my cup of tea, but there are compelling arguments which have been made for over a hundred years and I can recognize them as such, without feeling it impedes my personal crusade to vanquish white privilege and misogyny (tm).

Careful with that "his personal story" business. If you don't watch out, he might call you a worthless windbag. Or classless and unrefined. Or whatever else. He spills his business all over this corner of the internet, but gets upset when others are able to construct a narrative about his life and his philosophies. 

And I have trouble taking the POV of class-over-race-and-gender seriously if it oh, huh, jeez, how bout that, what are the odds, has the effect of propping up one's conception of oneself as a hardworking scrapper who succeeded against all odds etc etc. I'm sympathetic to it as an academic Marxist argument, don't get me wrong. But to me, it's very, very, very clear that that's not the direction he's coming from. When you are psychologically "accidentally, just-so-happens" propping yourself up like that and in the process saying some rather uninformed and obtuse things, all the while, wildly and sloppily lashing out at those who disagree...well, I'm not likely to find it compelling as arguments go.

Oh, and Bearly: if you don't like me relating your personal background to your politics, you have a multitude of options. One would be not to share so much on the internet. Another would be not to take transparently self-reassuring positions and then deny that aspect of them so fiercely that your opponents have no choice but to, you know, read the writing on the wall. I'm sure there are others. Use your imagination.

You feel you have additional information which influences your views; I'm just taking this discussion at face value, as in, in this thread.  Frankly, I like you both, and have only continued to follow a discussion which long ago fell into the traditional binary of black and white because because I respect you both.  But as you've both taken it ad hominem, I will say that it definitely is losing its appeal.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 05:01:53 PM
Just as it's myopic to focus on race at the expense of class, it's equally myopic to focus on class at the expense of race. That's all I've ever been saying to Bearly.
If this is all you have been saying, then you have been reiterating my points. It's ok to admit that some white people are badly underprivileged, while at the same time understanding the necessity of AA to deal with the larger racial problem.

But no - according to you, they are ALL recipients of "white privilege". It's ok to make generalizations like this about poor people despite of class, so long as the racial agenda isn't somehow impeded by it.

So you're saying that your mentally-challenged white client has never had the experience of NOT being followed and/or looked at askance in a 7-11 or similar, when a similar-but-black person was either followed or looked askance at? To keep it to the irrelevantly micro level, as you prefer. That's all it takes in my book to be the recipient of white privilege. And THAT'S all I've been saying.
I'm saying that when I was a teenager in bed-stuy and lefrak, I used to get followed around in the bodegas (no  7-11's in the hood.)

I'm not trying to say that OMG because of this I understand what it's like to be black in America - I will NEVER understand that. I never grew up in a family that was taken as slaves from our homeland, and forced to work here.

But I can say that my grandparents died in the holocaust, and I fled my country because my town was being overrun by WHITE right-wing fascists that threatened to kill my family because I belonged to a unique-looking ethnic minority (and have since killed my cousin whose family chose to remain there.) I think it's wrong to assume that all "white" people have not experienced racism. Just by lumping all of us in one racial group, demographers do us a significant racial disservice (Just as it would be wrong to say that all Hispanic Americans are "black", as they did in Texas early in this century.)

I support AA and other policies because I genuinely and personally empathize with the black, AA, and Hispanic communities for the racism that they face in this country to this day - but saying that white people do not get discriminated against flies in the face of hundreds of years of "white"-on-"white" crime, slavery, indentured servitude, war, and genocide. The bottom line is this - if I showed up in any exclusive country club or spa in this country, I too would be denied admission due to the way I look.

Have you ever NOT been followed in a 7-11? Still didn't answer me about your client. Regardless of whether a given white person has experienced racism, discrimination or something approximating one of the two, I maintain that that person has benefited, at some point in his or her life in America, from white privilege--e.g. on the occasion that said person was NOT followed at the 7-11, on the occasion that someone assumed he owned his car, on the occasion that she was able to, yes, find a band-aid that matched her skin-tone. Those are all benefits, real ones, of white privilege. Find me a white person who has never experienced one of those, ever. That's all I'm saying.

This is leaving aside, of course, relative proportions of who gets followed, in what contexts, how often, and what are the significances of the answers to those questions. Getting looked at funny in a bodega is probably less scarring then getting looked at funny when shopping for an engagement ring for your fiancee in a fancy jewelry store, because one of those is accepted as a place where people of power belong, and they've decided that you don't belong there. Whereas a bodega...not so much.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 05:03:18 PM
Oh, and Bearly: if you don't like me relating your personal background to your politics, you have a multitude of options. One would be not to share so much on the internet. Another would be not to take transparently self-reassuring positions and then deny that aspect of them so fiercely that your opponents have no choice but to, you know, read the writing on the wall. I'm sure there are others. Use your imagination.
If you don't like me alluding to your educational pedigree please remove it from your sig, K?

Also, black activists who happen to be black are not denigrated for the fact that they are black. NA activists who happen to be NA are not denigrated for the fact that they are NA.

I have said very clearly that my interest in this is more than academic. I do have a personal bone to pick. That doesn't mean that my position is wrong, or that I haven't considered your position.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 07, 2008, 05:04:25 PM
I think it's wrong to assume that all "white" people have not experienced racism. Just by lumping all of us in one racial group, demographers do us a significant racial disservice (Just as it would be wrong to say that all Hispanic Americans are "black", as they did in Texas early in this century.)

I feel like this is all you've wanted to say all along, and you've just taken the wrong tack in trying to say it.

I don't think anyone in this thread assumes that "white" people have not experienced racism.  I think we're saying, on average, "non-whites" just experience it more, and in more insidious ways.

I'm also sure we can all agree that demographic profiling is troublesome in a myriad ways, for both whites and non-whites (if we're going to adopt this binary for our present purposes).  But I think (and here MBW was on point) that this issue, which is in many ways class-based, need not be conflated with the concept of "white privilege", which is very much a skin thing.

The reason you, as a "white" person, feel like an outsider in a black neighborhood is because you are.  It's a defense mechanism -- they don't want us, we don't want them.  And it's terrible, and it's a reality -- I thoroughly agree with this.  But this is not what "white privilege" is, and there's not a concomitant "black privilege".  "White privilege" establishes a norm based purely on appearance which doesn't necessarily impart benefits in all cases, but does do so between similarly class-situated parties, one "non-white", one "white", in mainstream society.


FWIW, I've tried to avoid using the term "class" until now because I think it's such a distorted academic term by now, it often requires pages of argument just to define it.  Maybe it's like the word "privilege" in that sense.   :D
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 05:09:44 PM
I think it's wrong to assume that all "white" people have not experienced racism.

That isn't the argument that anyone has been making.

Quote
Just by lumping all of us in one racial group, demographers do us a significant racial disservice (Just as it would be wrong to say that all Hispanic Americans are "black", as they did in Texas early in this century.)

I'm not sure if this is directed towards the white privilege argument or not. If it is: the problem here is that it serves a different purpose. Talking about white privilege doesn't have to be (I edited here, because there may be some people who do this - I would argue with them as stridently as I am arguing with you) about saying that there is one white experience. Saying that there is a thing called white privilege that white people experience is part of acknowledging, understanding, and analyzing the way we construct race and identity. It is not saying that all white people are the same, much as you seem to want to make it into that. It is not about attempting to categorize and define all white people - it is acknowledging that this is something that happens.

Furthermore, bearly...you should not interpret the fact that I am having this argument with you to mean that I don't think that the things that have happened to you and to your family are important, or that the traumatic, tragic, and/or difficult things aren't just that, or that I don't think that they play an important role in making you who you are. That is absolutely not the case.

No one need point out to me that class matters. No one need point out to me that these things are complicated and intertwined in ways that cannot always be separated. No one should interpret anything that I am saying to mean that I think that race is always the most important operative factor, or don't acknowledge, understand, and sometimes agree with scholarship and thinking that focuses on other factors.

The only thing I have a problem with here is an attempt to remove one of these factors from consideration, particularly in the context of arguments put forth by myself and other individuals, in this thread, that maintain that this factor may well not be the most important factor that operates in any individual's life.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 07, 2008, 05:13:26 PM
Oh, and Bearly: if you don't like me relating your personal background to your politics, you have a multitude of options. One would be not to share so much on the internet. Another would be not to take transparently self-reassuring positions and then deny that aspect of them so fiercely that your opponents have no choice but to, you know, read the writing on the wall. I'm sure there are others. Use your imagination.
If you don't like me alluding to your educational pedigree please remove it from your sig, K?

Also, black activists who happen to be black are not denigrated for the fact that they are black. NA activists who happen to be NA are not denigrated for the fact that they are NA.

I have said very clearly that my interest in this is more than academic. I do have a personal bone to pick. That doesn't mean that my position is wrong, or that I haven't considered your position.

No, but it is assumed that I am an activist because I'm an Indian.  All the time.  Even here, I'm called a "walking stereotype".  Ironically, I started out as a peace/environmental activist, working for Greenpeace.  I think I saw one other NDN working there in my two year tenure in the organization's largest office, so not so much a Native activist group.

Yet you admit that people assume you take your position for "academic" reasons.  That's the general assumption when educated white people take positions.  When poor white people take positions, the assumption is that it's economic.  But seldom do white people assume white people take positions because they're white.  That's white privilege.

ETA:  I still don't discount what you're saying, Bearly, but I wanted to point out an example to what I view as the insidiousness of white privilege. (And note that it won't be long before someone new shows up and calls me "too sens-i-tive"... ::).)
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: MahlerGrooves on April 07, 2008, 05:17:41 PM
Cady and Dash, a LEGITIMATE question for you both (and one that I really, honestly want an opinion and answer on):

I tend to be the opposite of both of you in my opinion of what constitutes Whit privilege, yet I understand and respect your opinions (in fact, they have given me pause to think - something I am never averse to).  Now, my question:

Is it possible that in any given community - be it as small as a neighborhood to as large as a country - there is an automatic (and often subconscious) questioning and suspicion of anything that is seen as foreign to that community?  If so, is it possible that in different communities, this can manifest itself as suspicion of different groups of people depending on what the predominant cultural and racial makeup of the "norm" for that community is?

For example, it is possible a good argument can be made that whiteness is the norm on the national level and, therefore, anyone who is white is seen as fitting in, accepted, and - if you want to term it that way - the recipient of "privilege "  and anyone outside that culture is looked at suspiciously (unless they assimilate into the "norm" of white culture).

But, by that example, is it also possible that in a given neighborhood which is predominately Black and in which Black culture is the "norm", one who is Black receives "privilege" in that culture and anyone who is NOT Black is looked at with suspicion?

By that, I mean to ask isn't privilege in a specific community governed by the notion of what is normal within that community?

I'm not hoping to start a fight with this - I just want to know if you see any logic in my argument.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 05:25:59 PM
MBW - you're too sensitive!

(just getting it out of the way for you)
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 05:26:40 PM
Quote
Have you ever NOT been followed in a 7-11?
The incidents I mentioned all took place in the mid-late 1990's. I wasn't being followed because someone thought I was a terrorist. I was being followed because I was a teenager in the hood.

Quote
Still didn't answer me about your client.
I can't answer you about him because I am a paralegal, and I am handling his issue at the appellate level. The facts that I have given you are things that I have learned about him by reading the various briefs, memos, and crime reports in his case. It's not like I can walk into a death-row prison in texas and ask the guy.

Quote
Regardless of whether a given white person has experienced racism, discrimination or something approximating one of the two, I maintain that that person has benefited, at some point in his or her life in America, from white privilege--e.g. on the occasion that said person was NOT followed at the 7-11,
Every black person gets followed every time they step into the 7-11? There is racism, but it's not pervasive at this level.

Quote
on the occasion that someone assumed he owned his car,
What benefit is this to someone who has not ever owned a car, and cannot ever afford to own a car?

Quote
on the occasion that she was able to, yes, find a band-aid that matched her skin-tone.
I'm sorry, but poor white people cannot get home and business loans at the same rates that poor black people can. In NYC, there is minority-specific, affordable housing that poor white people can't get access to. If the contention is that black people can't get band-aids, it's certainly disappointing - but it's hardly evidence of privilege.

Quote
Those are all benefits, real ones, of white privilege. Find me a white person who has never experienced one of those, ever. That's all I'm saying.
I might not be able to. But I can't find a white person that can walk down the streets of South Bronx without getting looked at and shoulder-bumped. I can't find a white person who can get access to socio-economic based educational help at the same level that black people can. Millions of white people live in these kinds of conditions - being assumed to own a car when they can't afford to pay rent because they cannot benefit from housing policies designed to benefit URMs is hardly an example of white privilege.

Quote
This is leaving aside, of course, relative proportions of who gets followed, in what contexts, how often, and what are the significances of the answers to those questions.
Here I totally agree. The problem is that when you look at the aggregate NUMBER and PROPORTION of black people that face significant racial hardships, there is a clear national problem. One that I am more than happy to deal with - if necessary by taking actions that may harm even underprivileged white people.

Quote
Getting looked at funny in a bodega is probably less scarring then getting looked at funny when shopping for an engagement ring for your fiancee in a fancy jewelry store, because one of those is accepted as a place where people of power belong, and they've decided that you don't belong there. Whereas a bodega...not so much.
Getting looked at funny while shopping for an engagement ring is absolutely awful - but no more awful than being rejected for the opportunity to live in an affordable, comfortable apartment simply because you are *white*. I'm not saying that black people don't face unique racial issues - what I am saying is that at the lowest echelons of society, whites suffer significant institutionalized discrimination based entirely on their race.

The "privileges" that wealthy and middle class whites incur in the mainstream world are unduly paid for by placing the costs and burdens of "repaying" the minorities on the backs of the poor whites.

And so - the rich white man uses the poor black man to help fight the poor white man. And the entire world seems totally blind to it.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 05:35:42 PM
Cady and Dash, a LEGITIMATE question for you both (and one that I really, honestly want an opinion and answer on):

I tend to be the opposite of both of you in my opinion of what constitutes Whit privilege, yet I understand and respect your opinions (in fact, they have given me pause to think - something I am never averse to).  Now, my question:

Is it possible that in any given community - be it as small as a neighborhood to as large as a country - there is an automatic (and often subconscious) questioning and suspicion of anything that is seen as foreign to that community?  If so, is it possible that in different communities, this can manifest itself as suspicion of different groups of people depending on what the predominant cultural and racial makeup of the "norm" for that community is?

For example, it is possible a good argument can be made that whiteness is the norm on the national level and, therefore, anyone who is white is seen as fitting in, accepted, and - if you want to term it that way - the recipient of "privilege "  and anyone outside that culture is looked at suspiciously (unless they assimilate into the "norm" of white culture).

But, by that example, is it also possible that in a given neighborhood which is predominately Black and in which Black culture is the "norm", one who is Black receives "privilege" in that culture and anyone who is NOT Black is looked at with suspicion?

By that, I mean to ask isn't privilege in a specific community governed by the notion of what is normal within that community?

I'm not hoping to start a fight with this - I just want to know if you see any logic in my argument.

My short answer, meant in a truly congenial spirit, as I like you, thus far in our interactions: it seems that you're missing the forest for the trees.

To expand, a bit: see above, J's comment re defense mechanisms. And, to me, this is the most important thing: while in an individual community (or in a number of communities), whites may be looked askance at, are those communities that hold a lot of power over the lives of others? By and large?

This is why I get sort of incensed when people try and counter discussions about white racism with accusations of black racism. It's sort of missing the point. If Mister Racist over there in the corner hates purple people, well, that's a shame that he's a bigot, but if he doesn't have any power over any other people, I'm only interested in devoting at most rather limited resources to that problem. He's a shithead, what're you gonna do, move along, because his opinions about purple people aren't problematic in the same way that they would be if they were held by large swaths of powerful people, or entrenched in systems and institutions that exist and thrive to this day.

Black racism, black privilege, white people getting looked at funny in bodegas are all not, on the whole, as problematic to me because it's clear where power lies in this country. The problem isn't getting looked at funny at a store, really, to me. The problem is getting looked at funny in places and in ways that work to keep you relatively powerless: at a bank, or more symbolically, at a jewelry store. By extension, a 7-11 is just one more place that the color of your skin makes you untrustworthy, and so getting looked at there is psychologically scarring in the same way, because it reinforces all the other times and places where that has happened, and had real and strongly symbolic effects of keeping you relatively powerless.

Do I wish white people could shop at bodegas without getting looked at funny? Sure. That'd be nice. Do I think it's hugely problematic? No. I don't. So it's not something I think is worth talking about when you're talking about the things that ARE hugely problematic, because frankly it's often misdirection.

This is of course leaving aside all the defense mechanism stuff, which also is a huge reason to discount so-called "black privilege" as a problem in the same way white privilege is. I can talk about this if you need me to, but I'd think it's sort of figure-outable.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 05:37:56 PM
I think it's wrong to assume that all "white" people have not experienced racism. Just by lumping all of us in one racial group, demographers do us a significant racial disservice (Just as it would be wrong to say that all Hispanic Americans are "black", as they did in Texas early in this century.)

I feel like this is all you've wanted to say all along, and you've just taken the wrong tack in trying to say it.

I don't think anyone in this thread assumes that "white" people have not experienced racism.  I think we're saying, on average, "non-whites" just experience it more, and in more insidious ways.

I'm also sure we can all agree that demographic profiling is troublesome in a myriad ways, for both whites and non-whites (if we're going to adopt this binary for our present purposes).  But I think (and here MBW was on point) that this issue, which is in many ways class-based, need not be conflated with the concept of "white privilege", which is very much a skin thing.

The reason you, as a "white" person, feel like an outsider in a black neighborhood is because you are.  It's a defense mechanism -- they don't want us, we don't want them.  And it's terrible, and it's a reality -- I thoroughly agree with this.  But this is not what "white privilege" is, and there's not a concomitant "black privilege".  "White privilege" establishes a norm based purely on appearance which doesn't necessarily impart benefits in all cases, but does do so between similarly class-situated parties, one "non-white", one "white", in mainstream society.


FWIW, I've tried to avoid using the term "class" until now because I think it's such a distorted academic term by now, it often requires pages of argument just to define it.  Maybe it's like the word "privilege" in that sense.   :D

Just real quick, to clarify, J:

I totally agree that MORE black people have experienced racism. This is without question to me! I will go so far as to say that ALL black people have experienced racism of one sort or another (and, of course, there are forms of racism that are so pervasive that they happen on a systematic level, and even individuals who think they haven't been discriminated against, may very well have been). I am totally comfortable with calling this phenomenon "Black UNDERPRIVILEGE".

What I am addressing is that some or all of these racist phenomena occur to whites too - and when they do, they happen to whites at the lowest SES levels of society, who are defenseless to them, and their struggles are brushed off as if they don't exist, because the popular assumption seems to be that if you are white, you are privileged.

As for feeling uncomfortable in black neighborhoods - I think you misunderstood me man. I grew up in this culture - I love it here. If anything, I feel TOTALLY out of place in affluent white society.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 05:43:08 PM
Just real quick, to clarify, J:

I totally agree that MORE black people have experienced racism. This is without question to me! I will go so far as to say that ALL black people have experienced racism of one sort or another (and, of course, there are forms of racism that are so pervasive that they happen on a systematic level, and even individuals who think they haven't been discriminated against, may very well have been). I am totally comfortable with calling this phenomenon "Black UNDERPRIVILEGE".

What I am addressing is that some or all of these racist phenomena occur to whites too - and when they do, they happen to whites at the lowest SES levels of society, who are defenseless to them, and their struggles are brushed off as if they don't exist, because the popular assumption seems to be that if you are white, you are privileged.

As for feeling uncomfortable in black neighborhoods - I think you misunderstood me man. I grew up in this culture - I love it here. If anything, I feel TOTALLY out of place in affluent white society.

The bolded is wrong in two ways. First, I doubt very seriously that the majority of Americans believe in anything so strong as the concept of white privilege that I've been advocating for here. Second, I have never said that if you are white, you are privileged. What I have said, and continue to believe, is that you cannot be white in this country and never experience a single benefit of white privilege. You might not see it, you might not feel it, it might not help you in any tangible or noticeable way, but you have experienced it.

Your ability to misrepresent what I have said, over and over again, is almost amazing at this point.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 05:44:52 PM
I think it's wrong to assume that all "white" people have not experienced racism.

That isn't the argument that anyone has been making.

Quote
Just by lumping all of us in one racial group, demographers do us a significant racial disservice (Just as it would be wrong to say that all Hispanic Americans are "black", as they did in Texas early in this century.)

I'm not sure if this is directed towards the white privilege argument or not. If it is: the problem here is that it serves a different purpose. Talking about white privilege doesn't have to be (I edited here, because there may be some people who do this - I would argue with them as stridently as I am arguing with you) about saying that there is one white experience. Saying that there is a thing called white privilege that white people experience is part of acknowledging, understanding, and analyzing the way we construct race and identity. It is not saying that all white people are the same, much as you seem to want to make it into that. It is not about attempting to categorize and define all white people - it is acknowledging that this is something that happens.

Furthermore, bearly...you should not interpret the fact that I am having this argument with you to mean that I don't think that the things that have happened to you and to your family are important, or that the traumatic, tragic, and/or difficult things aren't just that, or that I don't think that they play an important role in making you who you are. That is absolutely not the case.

No one need point out to me that class matters. No one need point out to me that these things are complicated and intertwined in ways that cannot always be separated. No one should interpret anything that I am saying to mean that I think that race is always the most important operative factor, or don't acknowledge, understand, and sometimes agree with scholarship and thinking that focuses on other factors.

The only thing I have a problem with here is an attempt to remove one of these factors from consideration, particularly in the context of arguments put forth by myself and other individuals, in this thread, that maintain that this factor may well not be the most important factor that operates in any individual's life.
Cady - The argument that ALL whites are recipients of white privilege is exactly what I have been fighting against. The thing that set me off in the first place was a poster's assertion that all whites start off on third base, because they are not discriminated against. That's been my issue all along.

 I am not saying that there is no problem of race in America. The problem exists, and is pervasive, and I am happy to take all measures to try to reduce it. But to maintain that "all whites start on third base" and "whites don't face discrimination" is overly simplistic, racialist thinking that in my opinion only exacerbates the problem of race in America.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 07, 2008, 05:46:57 PM
MBW - you're too sensitive!

(just getting it out of the way for you)

Yeah, but the operative word was new.  You're old hat.
 :-*
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: MahlerGrooves on April 07, 2008, 05:50:13 PM
My short answer, meant in a truly congenial spirit, as I like you, thus far in our interactions: it seems that you're missing the forest for the trees.

To expand, a bit: see above, J's comment re defense mechanisms. And, to me, this is the most important thing: while in an individual community (or in a number of communities), whites may be looked askance at, are those communities that hold a lot of power over the lives of others? By and large?

This is why I get sort of incensed when people try and counter discussions about white racism with accusations of black racism. It's sort of missing the point. If Mister Racist over there in the corner hates purple people, well, that's a shame that he's a bigot, but if he doesn't have any power over any other people, I'm only interested in devoting at most rather limited resources to that problem. He's a shithead, what're you gonna do, move along, because his opinions about purple people aren't problematic in the same way that they would be if they were held by large swaths of powerful people, or entrenched in systems and institutions that exist and thrive to this day.

Black racism, black privilege, white people getting looked at funny in bodegas are all not, on the whole, as problematic to me because it's clear where power lies in this country. The problem isn't getting looked at funny at a store, really, to me. The problem is getting looked at funny in places and in ways that work to keep you relatively powerless: at a bank, or more symbolically, at a jewelry store. By extension, a 7-11 is just one more place that the color of your skin makes you untrustworthy, and so getting looked at there is psychologically scarring in the same way, because it reinforces all the other times and places where that has happened, and had real and strongly symbolic effects of keeping you relatively powerless.

Do I wish white people could shop at bodegas without getting looked at funny? Sure. That'd be nice. Do I think it's hugely problematic? No. I don't. So it's not something I think is worth talking about when you're talking about the things that ARE hugely problematic, because frankly it's often misdirection.

This is of course leaving aside all the defense mechanism stuff, which also is a huge reason to discount so-called "black privilege" as a problem in the same way white privilege is. I can talk about this if you need me to, but I'd think it's sort of figure-outable.

Ahh!  Ok.  That's the part I was missing.  So it's not your contention necessarily that in every community everywhere Whites are looked at as normal, but rather that the macro sense - that the "white" culture is the "norm" in the communities that hold and utilize power - is the one of immediate importance because of its implications on the macro level.

I guess I was just getting a bit confused.  Sorry!

I can figure the defense mechanism out.

And, for the record, I went to UG in Harlem and rarely felt uncomfortable.  We were a community, and as long as we respected each other, there were no problems at all, so I am not implying that a Black community will, by default, be racist to Whites.

And I like you too, dash!  I think people don't realize it's possible to disagree with you and not make you mad so long as its 1-done in a respectful manner (as it should with anyone) and 2-done with an intelligent point.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 05:52:59 PM
MBW - you're too sensitive!

(just getting it out of the way for you)

Yeah, but the operative word was new.  You're old hat.
 :-*

damn :( I wanted the honor. Are you going to make me make an alt?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 07, 2008, 05:56:52 PM
MBW - you're too sensitive!

(just getting it out of the way for you)

Yeah, but the operative word was new.  You're old hat.
 :-*

damn :( I wanted the honor. Are you going to make me make an alt?

Oh, alright...If Hannibal doesn't show up, you're it.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 05:58:15 PM
Ahh!  Ok.  That's the part I was missing.  So it's not your contention necessarily that in every community everywhere Whites are looked at as normal, but rather that the macro sense - that the "white" culture is the "norm" in the communities that hold and utilize power - is the one of immediate importance because of its implications on the macro level.

I guess I was just getting a bit confused.  Sorry!

I can figure the defense mechanism out.

And, for the record, I went to UG in Harlem and rarely felt uncomfortable.  We were a community, and as long as we respected each other, there were no problems at all, so I am not implying that a Black community will, by default, be racist to Whites.

And I like you too, dash!  I think people don't realize it's possible to disagree with you and not make you mad so long as its 1-done in a respectful manner (as it should with anyone) and 2-done with an intelligent point.

Yeah, I don't feel like a dragon-lady, honestly. I just get frustrated when I perceive as a willful refusal to get it ("it" being nothing more controversial than what I'm actually saying, and not what Willful Refuser thinks I'm saying, or wants me to be saying). You seem to have a rather good handle on what I was saying, whether or not you agree with it. Which makes me more pleased with you than I already was! Not that that matters at all, because I'm a stranger on the internet, but yay for you!

I'll be in Philly this summer, so I'll be very up on recent food news in the city. And feel free to hit me with any other local-type questions.

Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 05:59:35 PM
Cady - The argument that ALL whites are recipients of white privilege is exactly what I have been fighting against. The thing that set me off in the first place was a poster's assertion that all whites start off on third base, because they are not discriminated against. That's been my issue all along.

 I am not saying that there is no problem of race in America. The problem exists, and is pervasive, and I am happy to take all measures to try to reduce it. But to maintain that "all whites start on third base" and "whites don't face discrimination" is overly simplistic, racialist thinking that in my opinion only exacerbates the problem of race in America.

Yeah, I got that that's what you're arguing against, and I've been pointing out to you for days why I find it problematic. Yet you never once have managed to actually address what I'm saying.

I agree that saying that all white people start off on 3rd base and are not discriminated against is problematic - I think that that much is apparent from the things that I have been saying.

However, that is not the same thing as saying that white privilege exists.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 06:01:23 PM
::dances:: (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZEatkIE_PY)

best post in the thread.

-

MG, dash beat me to it. I generally sign on to what she said.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: MahlerGrooves on April 07, 2008, 06:03:35 PM
Yeah, I don't feel like a dragon-lady, honestly. I just get frustrated when I perceive as a willful refusal to get it ("it" being nothing more controversial than what I'm actually saying, and not what Willful Refuser thinks I'm saying, or wants me to be saying). You seem to have a rather good handle on what I was saying, whether or not you agree with it. Which makes me more pleased with you than I already was! Not that that matters at all, because I'm a stranger on the internet, but yay for you!

I'll be in Philly this summer, so I'll be very up on recent food news in the city. And feel free to hit me with any other local-type questions.



I think too often people equate a desire for people to understand them for an insistence that they agree with them.  I know there is a huge difference, and I - personally - like understanding things with which I do NOT agree as much as I understand those with which I do.  Without that, how can one be informed in their opinions?

And, I already live in Philly!!  So this summer, let's get some food!  The future-wife and I are total foodies, and love the restaurant scene here.  PM me with what firm you're going to be with - I'm quite interested.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 06:04:22 PM
::dances:: (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZEatkIE_PY)

best post in the thread.

-

MG, dash beat me to it. I generally sign on to what she said.

Weasel word! How dare you disagree with me!!!!

eta: I'm totally dying to get to Xochitl, Osteria, and Zahav (when/if it opens). Oh I can't wait to be home. But, um, I'm totally not working for a firm. Hee.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 06:05:52 PM
::dances:: (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZEatkIE_PY)

best post in the thread.

-

MG, dash beat me to it. I generally sign on to what she said.

Weasel word! How dare you disagree with me!!!!

I'm sorry! I'm thinking about thai food, so I didn't read closely!

I think this is where you call me a bigot?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 07, 2008, 06:09:25 PM
::dances:: (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZEatkIE_PY)

best post in the thread.

-

MG, dash beat me to it. I generally sign on to what she said.

Weasel word! How dare you disagree with me!!!!

I'm sorry! I'm thinking about thai food, so I didn't read closely!

I think this is where you call me a bigot?

Bigot.

Ah, I've been wanting to do that to someone all day.  Thanks for putting yourself out there for that.

 ;)
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: MahlerGrooves on April 07, 2008, 06:10:27 PM
::dances:: (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZEatkIE_PY)

best post in the thread.

-

MG, dash beat me to it. I generally sign on to what she said.

Weasel word! How dare you disagree with me!!!!

eta: I'm totally dying to get to Xochitl, Osteria, and Zahav (when/if it opens). Oh I can't wait to be home. But, um, I'm totally not working for a firm. Hee.

Osteria is AWESOME!!!  I've been there AND to Vetri.  I like Vetri better just because it's a real event, a culinary knockout punch (my SO took me here as a congrats dinner for getting into Penn), but Osteria is more accessible.  The food is of the same quality and is AMAZINGLY prepared (the former executive sous chef from Vetri got promoted and moved to Osteria).  Totally worth a visit.

Don't know the other two though.  And where are you working or what are you doing this summer?  Will you have time for a drink (and you're from Philly!?)?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 07, 2008, 06:10:43 PM
But to maintain that "all whites start on third base" and "whites don't face discrimination" is overly simplistic, racialist thinking that in my opinion only exacerbates the problem of race in America.


I don't understand why we spent so much time arguing, then.  Both sides of this debate clearly agree on this issue.  Not all whites start on third base.  Many whites do face discrimination.  "Discrimination" is just an extremely diverse and complex concept.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 06:11:13 PM
The bolded is wrong in two ways. First, I doubt very seriously that the majority of Americans believe in anything so strong as the concept of white privilege that I've been advocating for here. Second, I have never said that if you are white, you are privileged. What I have said, and continue to believe, is that you cannot be white in this country and never experience a single benefit of white privilege. You might not see it, you might not feel it, it might not help you in any tangible or noticeable way, but you have experienced it.
And I repeat again that if a privilege is not "tangible" or "noticable" to an individual, they have not experienced it. In fact, experience, by definition, is subjective, and has to be noticed. If you tell me that someone gave me a million dollars while I was asleep, but then took it away before I woke up, does that mean I have experienced what it is to be a millionaire?

Quote
Your ability to misrepresent what I have said, over and over again, is almost amazing at this point.
Your ability to put words in my mouth, address things I have said to other people out of context and assume things that I haven't said is pretty impressive as well. Kudos.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 06:11:55 PM
But to maintain that "all whites start on third base" and "whites don't face discrimination" is overly simplistic, racialist thinking that in my opinion only exacerbates the problem of race in America.


I don't understand why we spent so much time arguing, then.  Both sides of this debate clearly agree on this issue.  Not all whites start on third base.  Many whites do face discrimination.  "Discrimination" is just an extremely diverse and complex concept.

TITCR! This is what I have been trying to say all along!

TYTYTYTY!
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 07, 2008, 06:15:42 PM
But to maintain that "all whites start on third base" and "whites don't face discrimination" is overly simplistic, racialist thinking that in my opinion only exacerbates the problem of race in America.


I don't understand why we spent so much time arguing, then.  Both sides of this debate clearly agree on this issue.  Not all whites start on third base.  Many whites do face discrimination.  "Discrimination" is just an extremely diverse and complex concept.

TITCR! This is what I have been trying to say all along!

TYTYTYTY!


That said, then, it's not that difficult to admit that white privilege exists without giving up the argument that many whites are discriminated against, if we can agree that they are two different types of discrimination in two different spheres.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 06:18:22 PM
::dances:: (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZEatkIE_PY)

best post in the thread.

-

MG, dash beat me to it. I generally sign on to what she said.

Weasel word! How dare you disagree with me!!!!

eta: I'm totally dying to get to Xochitl, Osteria, and Zahav (when/if it opens). Oh I can't wait to be home. But, um, I'm totally not working for a firm. Hee.

Osteria is AWESOME!!!  I've been there AND to Vetri.  I like Vetri better just because it's a real event, a culinary knockout punch (my SO took me here as a congrats dinner for getting into Penn), but Osteria is more accessible.  The food is of the same quality and is AMAZINGLY prepared (the former executive sous chef from Vetri got promoted and moved to Osteria).  Totally worth a visit.

Don't know the other two though.  And where are you working or what are you doing this summer?  Will you have time for a drink (and you're from Philly!?)?

Xochitl is fancypants Mexican. And I desperately love El Vez (@#!* the Stephen Starr haters, man, the guac is unreal, and omg, so is the tortilla soup), so even more fancypants Mexican is right up my alley. Zahav is coming soon, though not open yet--Israeli. I'm obsessed with Israeli food, and it's hard to find beyond falafel joints. And I'm a Philly lifer--NE born and raised.

I totally have time for a drink if you have time for gelato. I check the Capogiro flavor list every morning--isn't that pathetic? Yesterday, I think, I almost cried because they had Amarena and I have been going there since 12th grade, and I have NEVER been there when they have Amarena and omg, I am dying, dying, dying to try it.

I desperately want to get to Vetri, too, but I get a little squirrely about v. fine dining establishments because I have some categories of food I don't really eat (seafood; fungus; and organ meats, if you must know), and by the time I eliminate everything on the menu with one of those, there's usually one thing I can eat. So I feel like I should set my immediate sights on Osteria, and then move up to the big leagues. Also, your SO has good taste in celebratory restaurants. DAYUM.

ha ha ha, now I'm totally off topic. Bearly's going to send you a thank-you PM in about one minute if he hasn't already.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 06:19:39 PM
Cady - The argument that ALL whites are recipients of white privilege is exactly what I have been fighting against. The thing that set me off in the first place was a poster's assertion that all whites start off on third base, because they are not discriminated against. That's been my issue all along.

 I am not saying that there is no problem of race in America. The problem exists, and is pervasive, and I am happy to take all measures to try to reduce it. But to maintain that "all whites start on third base" and "whites don't face discrimination" is overly simplistic, racialist thinking that in my opinion only exacerbates the problem of race in America.

Yeah, I got that that's what you're arguing against, and I've been pointing out to you for days why I find it problematic. Yet you never once have managed to actually address what I'm saying.

I agree that saying that all white people start off on 3rd base and are not discriminated against is problematic - I think that that much is apparent from the things that I have been saying.

However, that is not the same thing as saying that white privilege exists.
I have said over and over again that in the macro sense, the white demographic is privileged. Please - tell me how I should word this so that I am not misunderstood.

For "White People", white privilege exists. For individual whites who face racial, economic and social discrimination, it does not. Is this message just unclear? Am I muddling things up somehow?

I'm not even asking anyone to AGREE with what I am saying. As I said, these issues are hella complex and can be viewed through many equally "right" lenses. I'm just asking people to understand and acknowledge it. Is it really that hard to get?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 06:25:35 PM
ha ha ha, now I'm totally off topic. Bearly's going to send you a thank-you PM in about one minute if he hasn't already.
Sorry, dood. I don't mind debate, and I have absolutely no problem getting my head chewed off when I challenge a concept as controversial as "white privilege" in the AA forum on LSD. I knew what I was getting into. If all this argument has even for one second made even one person consider that racial problems are not as simple and cut-and-dry as the community at large seems to believe, I have succeeded.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 07, 2008, 06:27:17 PM

For "White People", white privilege exists. For individual whites who face racial, economic and social discrimination, it does not. Is this message just unclear? Am I muddling things up somehow?



This is the crux of the matter.

It can't exist and not actually exist at the same time.  All whites experience white privilege in some way or another.  However, for many whites, that (in their case, meager) privilege is so curbed by other, powerful discriminatory factors that they effectively don't feel it at all.  In other words, a poor white dude might make his way into town from the trailer park and not be bugged by the police about what he's doing loitering in the grocery store parking lot while he fumbles for his keys, but since the banker scoffed at him for being "trailer trash" and summarily turned down his loan application for X, he's not going anywhere "up" in life soon.  But you take a black guy in the same situation -- well, he would've had to deal with the damn harassment too.

Of course, a thorough exploration of all this would necessitate a definition of "white", because discrimination based on skin color means we need to figure out what "skin color" means to whom.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 06:29:34 PM

For "White People", white privilege exists. For individual whites who face racial, economic and social discrimination, it does not. Is this message just unclear? Am I muddling things up somehow?



This is the crux of the matter.

It can't exist and not actually exist at the same time.  All whites experience white privilege in some way or another.  However, for many whites, that (in their case, meager) privilege is so curbed by other, powerful discriminatory factors that they effectively don't feel it at all.  In other words, a poor white dude might make his way into town from the trailer park and not be bugged by the police about what he's doing loitering in the grocery store parking lot while he fumbles for his keys, but since the banker scoffed at him for being "trailer trash" and summarily turned down his loan application for X, he's not going anywhere "up" in life soon.  But you take a black guy in the same situation -- well, he would've had to deal with the damn harassment too.

Of course, a thorough exploration of all this would necessitate a definition of "white", because discrimination based on skin color means we need to figure out what "skin color" means to whom.


Fantastic. THANK YOU J I LOVES YOU.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 06:29:43 PM
But to maintain that "all whites start on third base" and "whites don't face discrimination" is overly simplistic, racialist thinking that in my opinion only exacerbates the problem of race in America.


I don't understand why we spent so much time arguing, then.  Both sides of this debate clearly agree on this issue.  Not all whites start on third base.  Many whites do face discrimination.  "Discrimination" is just an extremely diverse and complex concept.

TITCR! This is what I have been trying to say all along!

TYTYTYTY!


That said, then, it's not that difficult to admit that white privilege exists without giving up the argument that many whites are discriminated against, if we can agree that they are two different types of discrimination in two different spheres.

I agree - this is why I have stated time and time again that at the macro level, the white community is privileged vis-a-vis the african american community. My only contention is that extending that concept of privilege to the micro sphere, and tagging individuals as privileged because whites *as a race* are privileged is unfair and detrimental to an honest racial dialogue.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 07, 2008, 06:30:52 PM
But to maintain that "all whites start on third base" and "whites don't face discrimination" is overly simplistic, racialist thinking that in my opinion only exacerbates the problem of race in America.


I don't understand why we spent so much time arguing, then.  Both sides of this debate clearly agree on this issue.  Not all whites start on third base.  Many whites do face discrimination.  "Discrimination" is just an extremely diverse and complex concept.

TITCR! This is what I have been trying to say all along!

TYTYTYTY!


That said, then, it's not that difficult to admit that white privilege exists without giving up the argument that many whites are discriminated against, if we can agree that they are two different types of discrimination in two different spheres.

I agree - this is why I have stated time and time again that at the macro level, the white community is privileged vis-a-vis the african american community. My only contention is that extending that concept of privilege to the micro sphere, and tagging individuals as privileged because whites *as a race* are privileged is unfair and detrimental to an honest racial dialogue.


I honestly just think we're not using the same definition of "privilege".
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 06:31:32 PM
Cady - The argument that ALL whites are recipients of white privilege is exactly what I have been fighting against. The thing that set me off in the first place was a poster's assertion that all whites start off on third base, because they are not discriminated against. That's been my issue all along.

 I am not saying that there is no problem of race in America. The problem exists, and is pervasive, and I am happy to take all measures to try to reduce it. But to maintain that "all whites start on third base" and "whites don't face discrimination" is overly simplistic, racialist thinking that in my opinion only exacerbates the problem of race in America.

Yeah, I got that that's what you're arguing against, and I've been pointing out to you for days why I find it problematic. Yet you never once have managed to actually address what I'm saying.

I agree that saying that all white people start off on 3rd base and are not discriminated against is problematic - I think that that much is apparent from the things that I have been saying.

However, that is not the same thing as saying that white privilege exists.
I have said over and over again that in the macro sense, the white demographic is privileged. Please - tell me how I should word this so that I am not misunderstood.

For "White People", white privilege exists. For individual whites who face racial, economic and social discrimination, it does not. Is this message just unclear? Am I muddling things up somehow?

I'm not even asking anyone to AGREE with what I am saying. As I said, these issues are hella complex and can be viewed through many equally "right" lenses. I'm just asking people to understand and acknowledge it. Is it really that hard to get?

I have acknowledged (and stated myself, unprovoked) that these issues are complex and intertwined. So no, that's not so hard to get.

The middle bit is what we continue to have problems with. Even white people who face all kinds of other discrimination still benefit from white privilege. I've qualified this, again and again, with statements that of course there are other factors in play.

See J's 8:27 post for an articulate representation of my position
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 06:33:09 PM

I totally have time for a drink if you have time for gelato. I check the Capogiro flavor list every morning--isn't that pathetic? Yesterday, I think, I almost cried because they had Amarena and I have been going there since 12th grade, and I have NEVER been there when they have Amarena and omg, I am dying, dying, dying to try it.

sister of my soul.

i need a 12 step program. or more money.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 06:36:39 PM
J, Dash and I agree on one thing - we both love you!


For "White People", white privilege exists. For individual whites who face racial, economic and social discrimination, it does not. Is this message just unclear? Am I muddling things up somehow?



This is the crux of the matter.

It can't exist and not actually exist at the same time.  All whites experience white privilege in some way or another.  However, for many whites, that (in their case, meager) privilege is so curbed by other, powerful discriminatory factors that they effectively don't feel it at all.  In other words, a poor white dude might make his way into town from the trailer park and not be bugged by the police about what he's doing loitering in the grocery store parking lot while he fumbles for his keys, but since the banker scoffed at him for being "trailer trash" and summarily turned down his loan application for X, he's not going anywhere "up" in life soon.  But you take a black guy in the same situation -- well, he would've had to deal with the damn harassment too.

Of course, a thorough exploration of all this would necessitate a definition of "white", because discrimination based on skin color means we need to figure out what "skin color" means to whom.

I appreciate where you are coming from, but this paints a much rosier picture of socio-racial relations than what I have experienced. When the trailer park guy rolls into a nice town to take out a bank loan, as soon as he parks or starts fumbling for his keys in the parking lot, the sherriff will be right on him saying "what you doin' 'round here, ya hillbilly?" When a white man with a crooked nose, and curly black hair rolls into town, that same sherriff will say "what you doin' 'round here, ya terrorist?".

I'm not saying that blacks don't face unique challenges - but assuming that people don't face RACIAL persecution because their skin color is white, or because demographers have classified them as white isn't quite accurate either.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: MahlerGrooves on April 07, 2008, 06:36:48 PM

I totally have time for a drink if you have time for gelato. I check the Capogiro flavor list every morning--isn't that pathetic? Yesterday, I think, I almost cried because they had Amarena and I have been going there since 12th grade, and I have NEVER been there when they have Amarena and omg, I am dying, dying, dying to try it.

sister of my soul.

i need a 12 step program. or more money.

So do I.  I live really close to one of their locations, and I am addicted.  Are you BOTH in Philly now?  I think an LSD gelato run is in order!
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 06:38:26 PM
Cady - The argument that ALL whites are recipients of white privilege is exactly what I have been fighting against. The thing that set me off in the first place was a poster's assertion that all whites start off on third base, because they are not discriminated against. That's been my issue all along.

 I am not saying that there is no problem of race in America. The problem exists, and is pervasive, and I am happy to take all measures to try to reduce it. But to maintain that "all whites start on third base" and "whites don't face discrimination" is overly simplistic, racialist thinking that in my opinion only exacerbates the problem of race in America.

Yeah, I got that that's what you're arguing against, and I've been pointing out to you for days why I find it problematic. Yet you never once have managed to actually address what I'm saying.

I agree that saying that all white people start off on 3rd base and are not discriminated against is problematic - I think that that much is apparent from the things that I have been saying.

However, that is not the same thing as saying that white privilege exists.
I have said over and over again that in the macro sense, the white demographic is privileged. Please - tell me how I should word this so that I am not misunderstood.

For "White People", white privilege exists. For individual whites who face racial, economic and social discrimination, it does not. Is this message just unclear? Am I muddling things up somehow?

I'm not even asking anyone to AGREE with what I am saying. As I said, these issues are hella complex and can be viewed through many equally "right" lenses. I'm just asking people to understand and acknowledge it. Is it really that hard to get?

I have acknowledged (and stated myself, unprovoked) that these issues are complex and intertwined. So no, that's not so hard to get.

The middle bit is what we continue to have problems with. Even white people who face all kinds of other discrimination still benefit from white privilege. I've qualified this, again and again, with statements that of course there are other factors in play.

See J's 8:27 post for an articulate representation of my position
Cady, I hear where you are coming from. I understand where you are coming from. I just disagree. See my above quote to J for why.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 07, 2008, 06:39:40 PM
J, Dash and I agree on one thing - we both love you!


For "White People", white privilege exists. For individual whites who face racial, economic and social discrimination, it does not. Is this message just unclear? Am I muddling things up somehow?



This is the crux of the matter.

It can't exist and not actually exist at the same time.  All whites experience white privilege in some way or another.  However, for many whites, that (in their case, meager) privilege is so curbed by other, powerful discriminatory factors that they effectively don't feel it at all.  In other words, a poor white dude might make his way into town from the trailer park and not be bugged by the police about what he's doing loitering in the grocery store parking lot while he fumbles for his keys, but since the banker scoffed at him for being "trailer trash" and summarily turned down his loan application for X, he's not going anywhere "up" in life soon.  But you take a black guy in the same situation -- well, he would've had to deal with the damn harassment too.

Of course, a thorough exploration of all this would necessitate a definition of "white", because discrimination based on skin color means we need to figure out what "skin color" means to whom.

I appreciate where you are coming from, but this paints a much rosier picture of socio-racial relations than what I have experienced. When the trailer park guy rolls into a nice town to take out a bank loan, as soon as he parks, the sherriff will be right on him saying "what you doin' 'round here, ya hillbilly?" When a white man with a crooked nose, and curly black hair rolls into town, that same sherriff will say "what you doin' 'round here, ya terrorist?".

I'm not saying that blacks don't face unique challenges - but assuming that people don't face RACIAL persecution because their skin color is white, or because demographers have classified them as white isn't quite accurate either.


Yo!  Finally!

Yes, this is correct.  But why is this correct?  Because these white people are not being accepted as "White".  There's a spectrum here -- the further away from "White" you are, the less privilege you get.*





*Of course, the polar opposite of "White" isn't necessarily "black" -- just ask MBW. 
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 06:42:42 PM
J, Dash and I agree on one thing - we both love you!


For "White People", white privilege exists. For individual whites who face racial, economic and social discrimination, it does not. Is this message just unclear? Am I muddling things up somehow?



This is the crux of the matter.

It can't exist and not actually exist at the same time.  All whites experience white privilege in some way or another.  However, for many whites, that (in their case, meager) privilege is so curbed by other, powerful discriminatory factors that they effectively don't feel it at all.  In other words, a poor white dude might make his way into town from the trailer park and not be bugged by the police about what he's doing loitering in the grocery store parking lot while he fumbles for his keys, but since the banker scoffed at him for being "trailer trash" and summarily turned down his loan application for X, he's not going anywhere "up" in life soon.  But you take a black guy in the same situation -- well, he would've had to deal with the damn harassment too.

Of course, a thorough exploration of all this would necessitate a definition of "white", because discrimination based on skin color means we need to figure out what "skin color" means to whom.

I appreciate where you are coming from, but this paints a much rosier picture of socio-racial relations than what I have experienced. When the trailer park guy rolls into a nice town to take out a bank loan, as soon as he parks, the sherriff will be right on him saying "what you doin' 'round here, ya hillbilly?" When a white man with a crooked nose, and curly black hair rolls into town, that same sherriff will say "what you doin' 'round here, ya terrorist?".

I'm not saying that blacks don't face unique challenges - but assuming that people don't face RACIAL persecution because their skin color is white, or because demographers have classified them as white isn't quite accurate either.


Yo!  Finally!

Yes, this is correct.  But why is this correct?  Because these white people are not being accepted as "White".  There's a spectrum here -- the further away from "White" you are, the less privilege you get.*





*Of course, the polar opposite of "White" isn't necessarily "black" -- just ask MBW. 

WOOT! I 100% agree! But hense my initial and continued problem! In this country, and around the world, "white" is not always "white". To assume that all "whites" have access to "white" privilege is to disregard this key issue.

What I just said was total jibberish, but you understand where I am coming from.


*True 'nuff.

Edit -
I hope you forgive me for not addressing your earlier, eloquent post, because I think we have hashed out what needed to be said above.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 07, 2008, 06:43:05 PM
But to maintain that "all whites start on third base" and "whites don't face discrimination" is overly simplistic, racialist thinking that in my opinion only exacerbates the problem of race in America.


I don't understand why we spent so much time arguing, then.  Both sides of this debate clearly agree on this issue.  Not all whites start on third base.  Many whites do face discrimination.  "Discrimination" is just an extremely diverse and complex concept.

TITCR! This is what I have been trying to say all along!

TYTYTYTY!


That said, then, it's not that difficult to admit that white privilege exists without giving up the argument that many whites are discriminated against, if we can agree that they are two different types of discrimination in two different spheres.

I agree - this is why I have stated time and time again that at the macro level, the white community is privileged vis-a-vis the african american community. My only contention is that extending that concept of privilege to the micro sphere, and tagging individuals as privileged because whites *as a race* are privileged is unfair and detrimental to an honest racial dialogue.


I honestly just think we're not using the same definition of "privilege".


J, I think you're right.

ETA:...And in the time it took me to tell the spouse what kind of pizza to order and how much milk to pick up, you all seemed to have worked through that.  Guess I should pay attention to the "since you posted, 10 zillion replies..."
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 06:46:36 PM
J, Dash and I agree on one thing - we both love you!


For "White People", white privilege exists. For individual whites who face racial, economic and social discrimination, it does not. Is this message just unclear? Am I muddling things up somehow?



This is the crux of the matter.

It can't exist and not actually exist at the same time.  All whites experience white privilege in some way or another.  However, for many whites, that (in their case, meager) privilege is so curbed by other, powerful discriminatory factors that they effectively don't feel it at all.  In other words, a poor white dude might make his way into town from the trailer park and not be bugged by the police about what he's doing loitering in the grocery store parking lot while he fumbles for his keys, but since the banker scoffed at him for being "trailer trash" and summarily turned down his loan application for X, he's not going anywhere "up" in life soon.  But you take a black guy in the same situation -- well, he would've had to deal with the damn harassment too.

Of course, a thorough exploration of all this would necessitate a definition of "white", because discrimination based on skin color means we need to figure out what "skin color" means to whom.

I appreciate where you are coming from, but this paints a much rosier picture of socio-racial relations than what I have experienced. When the trailer park guy rolls into a nice town to take out a bank loan, as soon as he parks, the sherriff will be right on him saying "what you doin' 'round here, ya hillbilly?" When a white man with a crooked nose, and curly black hair rolls into town, that same sherriff will say "what you doin' 'round here, ya terrorist?".

I'm not saying that blacks don't face unique challenges - but assuming that people don't face RACIAL persecution because their skin color is white, or because demographers have classified them as white isn't quite accurate either.

Here's the thing, bearly. Every time we throw out an example of white privilege, you say "yeah, but this one guy in this place doesn't experience it like that." But the things we mention are just examples of the way that whiteness is privileged - the privilege functions in myriad ways. Sure, I can find examples of white people who don't benefit from each individual aspect of privilege, too. But it's kind of a silly exercise, and beside the point.

Further, a point of clarification: white privilege has very little to do with demographers. It's about how a person identifies their self, and how other people identify that person.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 06:54:02 PM

I totally have time for a drink if you have time for gelato. I check the Capogiro flavor list every morning--isn't that pathetic? Yesterday, I think, I almost cried because they had Amarena and I have been going there since 12th grade, and I have NEVER been there when they have Amarena and omg, I am dying, dying, dying to try it.

sister of my soul.

i need a 12 step program. or more money.

So do I.  I live really close to one of their locations, and I am addicted.  Are you BOTH in Philly now?  I think an LSD gelato run is in order!

I won't be til summer. But wait for me. I'm so in.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 06:58:19 PM
Here's the thing, bearly. Every time we throw out an example of white privilege, you say "yeah, but this one guy in this place doesn't experience it like that." But the things we mention are just examples of the way that whiteness is privileged - the privilege functions in myriad ways. Sure, I can find examples of white people who don't benefit from each individual aspect of privilege, too. But it's kind of a silly exercise, and beside the point.
But that's the whole point - There are individual examples (that add up to the experience of millions of people) of white people not being privileged in the macro way that you seem to be claiming that they are. Obviously I give individual examples, but I can give you entire social groups as well - White Arabs, White Gypsies, White Sikhs, White Appalachians, in many parts of the country White Jews, in most parts of the country ALL White Immigrants.

Quote
Further, a point of clarification: white privilege has very little to do with demographers. It's about how a person identifies their self, and how other people identify that person.
First, demographers and sociologists play a massive role in how race is defined in this country. Until the late 1970's, there wasn't even a racial group called "hispanics", but due to demographic redefinition, today they make up the fastest growing racial group in the country. Similarly, in my homeland, Jews and Gypsies are defined racially, going so far as to say that they are racially, ethnically, AND nationally not considered "white". My birth certificate says "Jew", but my mom's says "White".  These kind of classifications largely shape a nation's dialogue on race.

Second, I define myself as a Slavic-And-Jewish-American-Who-Grew-Up-In-The-Hood-And-Lives-In-A-Basement-But-With-Very-Hard-Work-Will-Eventually-Overcome-This-Crap. You define me as "white". Some white guy in Western Massachussets defined me a "f-ing Russkie Communist" because I came into a store with my mom, who speaks with a thick accent. I'm not sure whether this self-identification or social-identification line of thinking really gets either of us to the crux of the issue.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 07:02:55 PM
Watch out, Bearly. Cady's been drinking her Powerthirst.

(http://irritationx.googlepages.com/bear_blasting.JPG)
LMFAO!
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 07, 2008, 07:12:34 PM
Here's the thing, bearly. Every time we throw out an example of white privilege, you say "yeah, but this one guy in this place doesn't experience it like that." But the things we mention are just examples of the way that whiteness is privileged - the privilege functions in myriad ways. Sure, I can find examples of white people who don't benefit from each individual aspect of privilege, too. But it's kind of a silly exercise, and beside the point.
But that's the whole point - There are individual examples (that add up to the experience of millions of people) of white people not being privileged in the macro way that you seem to be claiming that they are. Obviously I give individual examples, but I can give you entire social groups as well - White Arabs, White Gypsies, White Appalachians, in many parts of the country White Jews, in most parts of the country ALL White Immigrants.

Quote
Further, a point of clarification: white privilege has very little to do with demographers. It's about how a person identifies their self, and how other people identify that person.
First, demographers and sociologists play a massive role in how race is defined in this country. Until the late 1970's, there wasn't even a racial group called "hispanics", but due to demographic redefinition, today they make up the fastest growing racial group in the country.

Second, I define myself as a Slavic-And-Jewish-American-Who-Grew-Up-In-The-Hood-And-Lives-In-A-Basement. You define me as "white". Some white guy in Western Massachussets defined me a "f-ing Russkie Communist" because I came into a store with my mom, who speaks with a thick accent. I'm not sure whether this self-identification or social-identification line of thinking really gets either of us to the crux of the issue.

Bearly, this is where you miss the basic point.  Without even opening your mouth, you benefit from your skin color.  If you and I were standing on a sidewalk in Rapid City, ten to one I'd get harassed by a cop before you would.  Here in California, I suspect, off the bat, many more people would speak to me in Spanish then they would to you, or ask if I spoke English, solely due to the color of our skin, hair and eyes.  Yes, as soon as I open my mouth, and babble, "no habla espanol", it's clear I'm not immigrant-Latina.  But I run into that assumption nearly every day, before I say a word.  And I dress out of an LL Bean catalog (sad but true, I'm from Maine), so it's not my clothing.

Now, you seem to argue that in Bed-Sty, your skin color was not a "privilege", as it led to your harassment.  But those are exceptions, not the "norm", as being black, red, yellow, brown, is still not viewed as "the norm" in America today.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 07:26:58 PM
Here's the thing, bearly. Every time we throw out an example of white privilege, you say "yeah, but this one guy in this place doesn't experience it like that." But the things we mention are just examples of the way that whiteness is privileged - the privilege functions in myriad ways. Sure, I can find examples of white people who don't benefit from each individual aspect of privilege, too. But it's kind of a silly exercise, and beside the point.
But that's the whole point - There are individual examples (that add up to the experience of millions of people) of white people not being privileged in the macro way that you seem to be claiming that they are. Obviously I give individual examples, but I can give you entire social groups as well - White Arabs, White Gypsies, White Appalachians, in many parts of the country White Jews, in most parts of the country ALL White Immigrants.

Quote
Further, a point of clarification: white privilege has very little to do with demographers. It's about how a person identifies their self, and how other people identify that person.
First, demographers and sociologists play a massive role in how race is defined in this country. Until the late 1970's, there wasn't even a racial group called "hispanics", but due to demographic redefinition, today they make up the fastest growing racial group in the country.

Second, I define myself as a Slavic-And-Jewish-American-Who-Grew-Up-In-The-Hood-And-Lives-In-A-Basement. You define me as "white". Some white guy in Western Massachussets defined me a "f-ing Russkie Communist" because I came into a store with my mom, who speaks with a thick accent. I'm not sure whether this self-identification or social-identification line of thinking really gets either of us to the crux of the issue.

Bearly, this is where you miss the basic point.  Without even opening your mouth, you benefit from your skin color.  If you and I were standing on a sidewalk in Rapid City, ten to one I'd get harassed by a cop before you would.  Here in California, I suspect, off the bat, many more people would speak to me in Spanish then they would to you, or ask if I spoke English, solely due to the color of our skin, hair and eyes.  Yes, as soon as I open my mouth, and babble, "no habla espanol", it's clear I'm not immigrant-Latina.  But I run into that assumption nearly every day, before I say a word.  And I dress out of an LL Bean catalog (sad but true, I'm from Maine), so it's not my clothing.

Now, you seem to argue that in Bed-Sty, your skin color was not a "privilege", as it lead to your harassment.  But those are exceptions, not the "norm", as being black, red, yellow, brown, is still not viewed as "the norm" in America today.
MBW... Gosh, I really don't want to antagonize you, especially since you have listened to what I had to say despite not necessarily agreeing with it. That's much appreciated.

Look, I can't pretend to know what it's like to be darker skinned in this country; but I do know what it's like to be an outsider - to be considered the "other". You know what I'm saying?

People might not ask me to speak spanish, but every time I go anywhere, people ask me if I am "from poland or something", like as if I am not an American. Even really cool posters who I totally adore have said things on FBLSD'11 like "Wow that last name is really crazy awesome! I could say it all day long!", not realizing that this ethnic last name is exactly what got my great-grandparents shot and buried in a shallow ditch during WWII. This is exactly the ethnic last name that forced my family to leave my childhood home and come to the US in the first place. I curse this last name to my dying day - but in the US, it's just a crazy hard to pronounce name with a couple of consonants placed together.

I understand that there are experiences you have that I can't relate to. I understand that your darker skin is in some places a badge of "abnormalcy." All I ask is to not be condescended to, called a "hard-lifer", told that I started my life on third base, and forced to agree that I cannot relate to what discrimination is because my skin happens to be white. I think you of all people can intimately relate to what I am trying to say.

Edit - Also, I just wanted to add - As you also are acutely well aware, not all *racial* discrimination is skin-color based. NA's like your boyfriend, Many Hispanics, Many Mixed and Light-Skinned Blacks and Many Asians have Caucasian-looking skin, but other phenotypal characteristics that make them look non-caucasian. Black curly hair and a large nose is as likely to get you killed in some places as black skin. To limit racial dialogue only to skin color, is to disregard the reality of how "irregular" features can create discrimination even for people with white skin.

Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 07:42:59 PM
Here's the thing, bearly. Every time we throw out an example of white privilege, you say "yeah, but this one guy in this place doesn't experience it like that." But the things we mention are just examples of the way that whiteness is privileged - the privilege functions in myriad ways. Sure, I can find examples of white people who don't benefit from each individual aspect of privilege, too. But it's kind of a silly exercise, and beside the point.
But that's the whole point - There are individual examples (that add up to the experience of millions of people) of white people not being privileged in the macro way that you seem to be claiming that they are. Obviously I give individual examples, but I can give you entire social groups as well - White Arabs, White Gypsies, White Appalachians, in many parts of the country White Jews, in most parts of the country ALL White Immigrants.

Quote
Further, a point of clarification: white privilege has very little to do with demographers. It's about how a person identifies their self, and how other people identify that person.
First, demographers and sociologists play a massive role in how race is defined in this country. Until the late 1970's, there wasn't even a racial group called "hispanics", but due to demographic redefinition, today they make up the fastest growing racial group in the country.

Second, I define myself as a Slavic-And-Jewish-American-Who-Grew-Up-In-The-Hood-And-Lives-In-A-Basement. You define me as "white". Some white guy in Western Massachussets defined me a "f-ing Russkie Communist" because I came into a store with my mom, who speaks with a thick accent. I'm not sure whether this self-identification or social-identification line of thinking really gets either of us to the crux of the issue.

The first point I was making was that, even if I can demonstrate one way in which white privilege doesn't function for an individual, there are a gazillion* other ways that it may. At least one is going to stick. I guarantee it. Maybe this is a quibbling point: that one way that white privilege sticks for the most disadvantaged white person you can find probably isn't going to make a profound difference (then again - maybe it will). But it is still there. And even if you found me a white person in the country who has never, ever, in any tangible or unconscious way, benefited from white privilege, that would make them a profoundly unlikely exception, but not one that disproves the rule.

As to the second point:

I'm kind of confused as to what you don't get, here. First, I suggest you don't tell me how I define you - we ran into problems with these kinds of assumptions before, remember? More importantly though, here are, as I see them, two of the major ways that white privilege functions:

1. You identify as "white." You thereby benefit psychologically from your perceived membership in a group that society identifies as the default, as good, as desirable.**

2. Other people (who understand whiteness to be a positive thing***) identify you as white. You benefit from increased goodwill, better treatment, more positive preconceptions, etc. Sure, if you don't meet that person's definition of "whiteness" you don't benefit. For those who do, however, suddenly birds appear and stars fall down from the sky.

And yes, sure, scholarship/demographers has some impact on how people define whiteness (seriously, check out Ngai's Impossible Subjects if you haven't, I think you'd find it really interesting). It's certainly been an evolving concept. That doesn't change the fact that when other people identify you as this evolving, amorphous "white", you benefit. When you**** identify yourself as "white", you benefit. (And please please please do not attempt to discredit these statements by talking about some guy who experiences it differently - I'm not saying this occurs for everyone in the same way, etc. etc., all the standard disclaimers I've been using throughout). And there is enough of a general sense of what whiteness means, and we have enough interactions in our lifetime, that one can pretty well identify those people who will, on the whole, benefit.

Finally, as to your last paragraph to MBW: That has not been the contention at all as this conversation has developed. I understand your frustration at that, but when I asked before that we set that aside for now, what I meant was that it would be swell if you not let that contention, which was not made by myself or anyone continuing this conversation (as far as I know), color the argument.

P.S. I've been called a Communist too! An America-hating one!

*willful and acknowledged exaggeration
**And of course there are people in our society who don't see it that way. But I'd go out and buy a hat and eat it if someone could actually demonstrate, to my satisfaction, that there isn't substantial evidence that society in general functions in this way, and that most people are aware of it (or, if not actively aware, experience the effects).
***Meaning, of course, not that all people perceive whiteness to be a positive thing, but rather that this happens with those people who do, consciously or unconsciously.
****General you: yes, I know, you live in a basement. I'm living in a basement this summer! That Basement Privilege is awesome, don't you think? (that was a joke)
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 07, 2008, 07:45:36 PM
Here's the thing, bearly. Every time we throw out an example of white privilege, you say "yeah, but this one guy in this place doesn't experience it like that." But the things we mention are just examples of the way that whiteness is privileged - the privilege functions in myriad ways. Sure, I can find examples of white people who don't benefit from each individual aspect of privilege, too. But it's kind of a silly exercise, and beside the point.
But that's the whole point - There are individual examples (that add up to the experience of millions of people) of white people not being privileged in the macro way that you seem to be claiming that they are. Obviously I give individual examples, but I can give you entire social groups as well - White Arabs, White Gypsies, White Appalachians, in many parts of the country White Jews, in most parts of the country ALL White Immigrants.

Quote
Further, a point of clarification: white privilege has very little to do with demographers. It's about how a person identifies their self, and how other people identify that person.
First, demographers and sociologists play a massive role in how race is defined in this country. Until the late 1970's, there wasn't even a racial group called "hispanics", but due to demographic redefinition, today they make up the fastest growing racial group in the country.

Second, I define myself as a Slavic-And-Jewish-American-Who-Grew-Up-In-The-Hood-And-Lives-In-A-Basement. You define me as "white". Some white guy in Western Massachussets defined me a "f-ing Russkie Communist" because I came into a store with my mom, who speaks with a thick accent. I'm not sure whether this self-identification or social-identification line of thinking really gets either of us to the crux of the issue.

Bearly, this is where you miss the basic point.  Without even opening your mouth, you benefit from your skin color.  If you and I were standing on a sidewalk in Rapid City, ten to one I'd get harassed by a cop before you would.  Here in California, I suspect, off the bat, many more people would speak to me in Spanish then they would to you, or ask if I spoke English, solely due to the color of our skin, hair and eyes.  Yes, as soon as I open my mouth, and babble, "no habla espanol", it's clear I'm not immigrant-Latina.  But I run into that assumption nearly every day, before I say a word.  And I dress out of an LL Bean catalog (sad but true, I'm from Maine), so it's not my clothing.

Now, you seem to argue that in Bed-Sty, your skin color was not a "privilege", as it lead to your harassment.  But those are exceptions, not the "norm", as being black, red, yellow, brown, is still not viewed as "the norm" in America today.
MBW... Gosh, I really don't want to antagonize you, especially since you have listened to what I had to say despite not necessarily agreeing with it. That's much appreciated.

Look, I can't pretend to know what it's like to be darker skinned in this country; but I do know what it's like to be an outsider - to be considered the "other". You know what I'm saying?

People might not ask me to speak spanish, but every time I go anywhere, people ask me if I am "from poland or something", like as if I am not an American. Even really cool posters who I totally adore have said things on FBLSD'11 like "Wow that last name is really crazy awesome! I could say it all day long!", not realizing that this ethnic last name is exactly what got my great-grandparents shot and buried in a shallow ditch during WWII. This is exactly the ethnic last name that forced my family to leave my childhood home and come to the US in the first place. I curse this last name to my dying day - but in the US, it's just a crazy hard to pronounce name with a couple of consonants placed together.

I understand that there are experiences you have that I can't relate to. I understand that your darker skin is in some places a badge of "abnormalcy." All I ask is to not be condescended to, told that I started my life on third base, and forced to agree that I cannot relate to what discrimination is because my skin happens to be white. I think you of all people can intimately relate to what I am trying to say.

I completely get "the Other" and it's implications in America.  I really do, and believe that it's a constantly shifting line.  And I don't at all denigrate the experience of recent immigrants (despite my wanting you all to book return passages ;)).  But when we talk about white privilege on the most basic level, it is in fact about skin color, even before you open your mouth.  Are there lots of different ways in which that plays out?  Sure, which is why I picked Rapid City and not Boston.  Heck, in Northeastern Arizona, I might not even be taken for native (yes, Virginia, not all Indians look alike.)  And while you may be outwardly viewed as "the Other" in a place where they can distinguish semetic from slavic features, that's generally not the case on Main Street USA.  Are Arabs "white" in America?  I would argue no, despite what the US Census states.  We ran into a group of Moroccans the other day hiking the Pinnacles, and despite their speaking predominately French, it was physically clear they weren't of European descent.  So, yes, there is a spectrum, but frankly, if you're able to "pass", I think you know it.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 07:47:05 PM
Here's the thing, bearly. Every time we throw out an example of white privilege, you say "yeah, but this one guy in this place doesn't experience it like that." But the things we mention are just examples of the way that whiteness is privileged - the privilege functions in myriad ways. Sure, I can find examples of white people who don't benefit from each individual aspect of privilege, too. But it's kind of a silly exercise, and beside the point.
But that's the whole point - There are individual examples (that add up to the experience of millions of people) of white people not being privileged in the macro way that you seem to be claiming that they are. Obviously I give individual examples, but I can give you entire social groups as well - White Arabs, White Gypsies, White Appalachians, in many parts of the country White Jews, in most parts of the country ALL White Immigrants.

Quote
Further, a point of clarification: white privilege has very little to do with demographers. It's about how a person identifies their self, and how other people identify that person.
First, demographers and sociologists play a massive role in how race is defined in this country. Until the late 1970's, there wasn't even a racial group called "hispanics", but due to demographic redefinition, today they make up the fastest growing racial group in the country.

Second, I define myself as a Slavic-And-Jewish-American-Who-Grew-Up-In-The-Hood-And-Lives-In-A-Basement. You define me as "white". Some white guy in Western Massachussets defined me a "f-ing Russkie Communist" because I came into a store with my mom, who speaks with a thick accent. I'm not sure whether this self-identification or social-identification line of thinking really gets either of us to the crux of the issue.

The first point I was making was that, even if I can demonstrate one way in which white privilege doesn't function for an individual, there are a gazillion* other ways that it may. At least one is going to stick. I guarantee it. Maybe this is a quibbling point: that one way that white privilege sticks for the most disadvantaged white person you can find probably isn't going to make a profound difference (then again - maybe it will). But it is still there. And even if you found me a white person in the country who has never, ever, in any tangible or unconscious way, benefited from white privilege, that would make them a profoundly unlikely exception, but not one that disproves the rule.

As to the second point:

I'm kind of confused as to what you don't get, here. First, I suggest you don't tell me how I define you - we ran into problems with these kinds of assumptions before, remember? More importantly though, here are, as I see them, two of the major ways that white privilege functions:

1. You identify as "white." You thereby benefit psychologically from your perceived membership in a group that society identifies as the default, as good, as desirable.**

2. Other people (who understand whiteness to be a positive thing***) identify you as white. You benefit from increased goodwill, better treatment, more positive preconceptions, etc. Sure, if you don't meet that person's definition of "whiteness" you don't benefit. For those who do, however, suddenly birds appear and stars fall down from the sky.

And yes, sure, scholarship/demographers has some impact on how people define whiteness (seriously, check out Ngai's Impossible Subjects if you haven't, I think you'd find it really interesting). It's certainly been an evolving concept. That doesn't change the fact that when other people identify you as this evolving, amorphous "white", you benefit. When you**** identify yourself as "white", you benefit. (And please please please do not attempt to discredit these statements by talking about some guy who experiences it differently - I'm not saying this occurs for everyone in the same way, etc. etc., all the standard disclaimers I've been using throughout). And there is enough of a general sense of what whiteness means, and we have enough interactions in our lifetime, that one can pretty well identify those people who will, on the whole, benefit.

Finally, as to your last paragraph to MBW: That has not been the contention at all as this conversation has developed. I understand your frustration at that, but when I asked before that we set that aside for now, what I meant was that it would be swell if you not let that contention, which was not made by myself or anyone continuing this conversation (as far as I know), color the argument.

P.S. I've been called a Communist too! An America-hating one!

*willful and acknowledged exaggeration
**And of course there are people in our society who don't see it that way. But I'd go out and buy a hat and eat it if someone could actually demonstrate, to my satisfaction, that there isn't substantial evidence that society in general functions in this way, and that most people are aware of it (or, if not actively aware, experience the effects).
***Meaning, of course, not that all people perceive whiteness to be a positive thing, but rather that this happens with those people who do, consciously or unconsciously.
****General you: yes, I know, you live in a basement. I'm living in a basement this summer! That Basement Privilege is awesome, don't you think? (that was a joke)
AFK a sec, will give this a readthrough soon.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 07:48:46 PM
Here's the thing, bearly. Every time we throw out an example of white privilege, you say "yeah, but this one guy in this place doesn't experience it like that." But the things we mention are just examples of the way that whiteness is privileged - the privilege functions in myriad ways. Sure, I can find examples of white people who don't benefit from each individual aspect of privilege, too. But it's kind of a silly exercise, and beside the point.
But that's the whole point - There are individual examples (that add up to the experience of millions of people) of white people not being privileged in the macro way that you seem to be claiming that they are. Obviously I give individual examples, but I can give you entire social groups as well - White Arabs, White Gypsies, White Appalachians, in many parts of the country White Jews, in most parts of the country ALL White Immigrants.

Quote
Further, a point of clarification: white privilege has very little to do with demographers. It's about how a person identifies their self, and how other people identify that person.
First, demographers and sociologists play a massive role in how race is defined in this country. Until the late 1970's, there wasn't even a racial group called "hispanics", but due to demographic redefinition, today they make up the fastest growing racial group in the country.

Second, I define myself as a Slavic-And-Jewish-American-Who-Grew-Up-In-The-Hood-And-Lives-In-A-Basement. You define me as "white". Some white guy in Western Massachussets defined me a "f-ing Russkie Communist" because I came into a store with my mom, who speaks with a thick accent. I'm not sure whether this self-identification or social-identification line of thinking really gets either of us to the crux of the issue.

Bearly, this is where you miss the basic point.  Without even opening your mouth, you benefit from your skin color.  If you and I were standing on a sidewalk in Rapid City, ten to one I'd get harassed by a cop before you would.  Here in California, I suspect, off the bat, many more people would speak to me in Spanish then they would to you, or ask if I spoke English, solely due to the color of our skin, hair and eyes.  Yes, as soon as I open my mouth, and babble, "no habla espanol", it's clear I'm not immigrant-Latina.  But I run into that assumption nearly every day, before I say a word.  And I dress out of an LL Bean catalog (sad but true, I'm from Maine), so it's not my clothing.

Now, you seem to argue that in Bed-Sty, your skin color was not a "privilege", as it lead to your harassment.  But those are exceptions, not the "norm", as being black, red, yellow, brown, is still not viewed as "the norm" in America today.
MBW... Gosh, I really don't want to antagonize you, especially since you have listened to what I had to say despite not necessarily agreeing with it. That's much appreciated.

Look, I can't pretend to know what it's like to be darker skinned in this country; but I do know what it's like to be an outsider - to be considered the "other". You know what I'm saying?

People might not ask me to speak spanish, but every time I go anywhere, people ask me if I am "from poland or something", like as if I am not an American. Even really cool posters who I totally adore have said things on FBLSD'11 like "Wow that last name is really crazy awesome! I could say it all day long!", not realizing that this ethnic last name is exactly what got my great-grandparents shot and buried in a shallow ditch during WWII. This is exactly the ethnic last name that forced my family to leave my childhood home and come to the US in the first place. I curse this last name to my dying day - but in the US, it's just a crazy hard to pronounce name with a couple of consonants placed together.

I understand that there are experiences you have that I can't relate to. I understand that your darker skin is in some places a badge of "abnormalcy." All I ask is to not be condescended to, told that I started my life on third base, and forced to agree that I cannot relate to what discrimination is because my skin happens to be white. I think you of all people can intimately relate to what I am trying to say.

I completely get "the Other" and it's implications in America.  I really do, and believe that it's a constantly shifting line.  And I don't at all denigrate the experience of recent immigrants (despite my wanting you all to book return passages ;)).  But when we talk about white privilege on the most basic level, it is in fact about skin color, even before you open your mouth.  Are there lots of different ways in which that plays out?  Sure, which is why I picked Rapid City and not Boston.  Heck, in Northeastern Arizona, I might not even be taken for native (yes, Virginia, not all Indians look alike.)  And while you may be outwardly viewed as "the Other" in a place where they can distinguish semetic from slavic features, that's generally not the case on Main Street USA.  Are Arabs "white" in America?  I would argue no, despite what the US Census states.  We ran into a group of Moroccans the other day hiking the Pinnacles, and despite their speeching predominately French, it was physically clear they weren't of European descent.  So, yes, there is a spectrum, but frankly, if you're able to "pass", I think you know it.
I added an edit that also goes into some of the phenotypal stuff you just brought up as you were typing it (great minds, hehe). Lemme know what you think.

Also, just to bring up a funny little factoid: You couldn't book a return passage for me to my home country. Since my Birth certificate reads "Jew", I am currently legally considered to never have had citizenship status in the country of my birth. Sweet, right?

Looks like you are stuck with my whiteness over here for a while. :(
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 07:54:42 PM
P.S. MBW, I'll totally move back to Sweden if you pay  :-*
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 07:58:56 PM

Also, just to bring up a funny little factoid: You couldn't book a return passage for me to my home country. Since my Birth certificate reads "Jew", I am currently legally considered to never have had citizenship status in the country of my birth. Sweet, right?

Looks like you are stuck with my whiteness over here for a while. :(

happily, you can go to Israel, which tries to function as a proxy home-country for people in your precise situation. have a nice trip. Although I don't think MBW agreed to anything nicer than coach, so the trip may not in fact be that nice.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 07, 2008, 08:01:50 PM
P.S. MBW, I'll totally move to Sweden if you pay  :-*

I'll even come along as a translator, if you'd like ;) (Yeah, how weird is that?  An Indian who speaks Swedish? Strange but true...)
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 08:04:16 PM
P.S. MBW, I'll totally move to Sweden if you pay  :-*

I'll even come along as a translator, if you'd like ;) (Yeah, how weird is that?  An Indian who speaks Swedish? Strange but true...)

Awesome. My grandma was the last one in the family to speak Swedish :( damn the melting pot!
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 07, 2008, 08:13:22 PM
P.S. MBW, I'll totally move to Sweden if you pay  :-*

I'll even come along as a translator, if you'd like ;) (Yeah, how weird is that?  An Indian who speaks Swedish? Strange but true...)

Awesome. My grandma was the last one in the family to speak Swedish :( damn the melting pot!

I was an exchange student when I was sixteen.  No one believed I was American - they thought my Swedish was too good (came from a bilingual family, so languages were easy for me to pick up) and that I didn't "look American".  They compared me to another exchange student, who they thought was the "classic American" - she was blond, blue-eyed and from Minnesota.  And her name was Andersson.  Bah.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 08:18:09 PM
P.S. MBW, I'll totally move to Sweden if you pay  :-*

I'll even come along as a translator, if you'd like ;) (Yeah, how weird is that?  An Indian who speaks Swedish? Strange but true...)

Awesome. My grandma was the last one in the family to speak Swedish :( damn the melting pot!

I was an exchange student when I was sixteen.  No one believed I was American - they thought my Swedish was too good (came from a bilingual family, so languages were easy for me to pick up) and that I didn't "look American". They compared me to another exchange student, who they thought was the "classic American" - she was blond, blue-eyed and from Minnesota.  And her name was Andersson.  Bah.

That's not the classic American?  ???
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 08:18:33 PM
P.S. MBW, I'll totally move to Sweden if you pay  :-*

I'll even come along as a translator, if you'd like ;) (Yeah, how weird is that?  An Indian who speaks Swedish? Strange but true...)

Awesome. My grandma was the last one in the family to speak Swedish :( damn the melting pot!

I was an exchange student when I was sixteen.  No one believed I was American - they thought my Swedish was too good (came from a bilingual family, so languages were easy for me to pick up) and that I didn't "look American".  They compared me to another exchange student, who they thought was the "classic American" - she was blond, blue-eyed and from Minnesota.  And her name was Andersson.  Bah.

Was she...Cady?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: goaliechica on April 07, 2008, 08:21:20 PM
Wait.... did this thread end up turning into a cuddlefest?

lol.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 08:22:51 PM
Wait.... did this thread end up turning into a cuddlefest?

lol.

No. Not on my end. Except with people I totally already was cuddling with.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: goaliechica on April 07, 2008, 08:23:33 PM
Wait.... did this thread end up turning into a cuddlefest?

lol.

No. Not on my end. Except with people I totally already was cuddling with.

Just checking.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 08:23:55 PM
P.S. MBW, I'll totally move to Sweden if you pay  :-*

I'll even come along as a translator, if you'd like ;) (Yeah, how weird is that?  An Indian who speaks Swedish? Strange but true...)

Awesome. My grandma was the last one in the family to speak Swedish :( damn the melting pot!

I was an exchange student when I was sixteen.  No one believed I was American - they thought my Swedish was too good (came from a bilingual family, so languages were easy for me to pick up) and that I didn't "look American".  They compared me to another exchange student, who they thought was the "classic American" - she was blond, blue-eyed and from Minnesota.  And her name was Andersson.  Bah.

Was she...Cady?

I was totally trying to think of people I knew who it could have been until I remembered that MBW is a little more...um...well endowed when it comes to age?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 08:24:20 PM
Wait.... did this thread end up turning into a cuddlefest?

lol.

i ran out of names and curse words  :-\
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 07, 2008, 08:28:17 PM
P.S. MBW, I'll totally move to Sweden if you pay  :-*

I'll even come along as a translator, if you'd like ;) (Yeah, how weird is that?  An Indian who speaks Swedish? Strange but true...)

Awesome. My grandma was the last one in the family to speak Swedish :( damn the melting pot!

I was an exchange student when I was sixteen.  No one believed I was American - they thought my Swedish was too good (came from a bilingual family, so languages were easy for me to pick up) and that I didn't "look American".  They compared me to another exchange student, who they thought was the "classic American" - she was blond, blue-eyed and from Minnesota.  And her name was Andersson.  Bah.

Was she...Cady?

I was totally trying to think of people I knew who it could have been until I remembered that MBW is a little more...um...well endowed when it comes to age?

Maybe it was your mom?  ::)

And, sweetie, you can say it.  Old.  MBW is ancient.  Triassic, in fact.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 08:33:42 PM
P.S. MBW, I'll totally move to Sweden if you pay  :-*

I'll even come along as a translator, if you'd like ;) (Yeah, how weird is that?  An Indian who speaks Swedish? Strange but true...)

Awesome. My grandma was the last one in the family to speak Swedish :( damn the melting pot!

I was an exchange student when I was sixteen.  No one believed I was American - they thought my Swedish was too good (came from a bilingual family, so languages were easy for me to pick up) and that I didn't "look American".  They compared me to another exchange student, who they thought was the "classic American" - she was blond, blue-eyed and from Minnesota.  And her name was Andersson.  Bah.

Was she...Cady?

I was totally trying to think of people I knew who it could have been until I remembered that MBW is a little more...um...well endowed when it comes to age?

Maybe it was your mom?  ::)

And, sweetie, you can say it.  Old.  MBW is ancient.  Triassic, in fact.

WHY does no one say Triassic anymore? Isn't it like the best word ever? If I had a sports team I would call it Triassic. Just that. No city name. I would also call the team sports drink Triassic. I would call our branded gear Triassic as well. It sounds like "Try" and "ass kick." As in, I will try to get your ass kicked. By me. And my sports team.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 08:34:57 PM
MBW made a your mom joke. hehehe.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 07, 2008, 08:38:09 PM
MBW made a your mom joke. hehehe.

Yeah, but, it wasn't really a joke.  'Cause, you know, I've got a kid your age.

As I said, Triassic.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 08:44:58 PM
Quote
The first point I was making was that, even if I can demonstrate one way in which white privilege doesn't function for an individual, there are a gazillion* other ways that it may. At least one is going to stick. I guarantee it. Maybe this is a quibbling point: that one way that white privilege sticks for the most disadvantaged white person you can find probably isn't going to make a profound difference (then again - maybe it will). But it is still there. And even if you found me a white person in the country who has never, ever, in any tangible or unconscious way, benefited from white privilege, that would make them a profoundly unlikely exception, but not one that disproves the rule.
I see what you are getting at here, but the jist of my point is that for an under-represented white (I'll just start refering to these people as URW's to simplify the dialoge rather than having to keep saying "middle easterner", slav, etc.), there are far more commonalities with how society relates to them and how they relate to society with hispanics and asians than there are with WASPs and other traditionally-privileged whites. We don't talk about Hispanic privilege (again, most hispanics were considered "white" until the late 1970's). We don't talk about Asian privilege. Why then do we make these kind of statements about people who are equally underrepresented and disadvantaged?

Quote
As to the second point:

I'm kind of confused as to what you don't get, here. First, I suggest you don't tell me how I define you - we ran into problems with these kinds of assumptions before, remember?
Apologies for that. I meant you more in the plural sense, as in "most posters, and general society would consider me white". If you don't consider me white, then I suppose that changes the dialogue a little bit, but I was encouraged to check Caucasian on my LSAT applications, so I assume society in general sees me as white.

Quote
More importantly though, here are, as I see them, two of the major ways that white privilege functions:

1. You identify as "white." You thereby benefit psychologically from your perceived membership in a group that society identifies as the default, as good, as desirable.**
But that's the crux of the issue. What white people self-identify as white? When you ask a Scotsman "what do you consider yourself?", and he will say "I am scottish", not "I am white". And he would be right in doing so, because for thousands of years, Scots have been considered an entirely different race of people from the angles - to the point where the most common *racial* slaves sold in Great Britain were Scots. To this day, in Russia, the word Skatina (pronounced Scot-ee-na) means "piece of rot", because the vikings who sold Scottish slaves around the world introduced it into the vernacular. The idea of breaking down phenotypes by *skin color* as opposed to other prominent features is a uniquely American idea. But even in America, Italians, Irish and Jews were at one point popularly called "niggers". The fact that today we tend to focus on skin color more than we do on say, height, or nose shape, body structure, etc. is a feature of what I consider a distorted view of history, and a distorted way of actually defining race. There are still neighborhoods in Boston where you really shouldn't go if you are an Italian. There are still social clubs that will restrict people because they are Arabic whites. Why are we narrowing the definition of race to only skin color, when clearly, people have been discriminated against - and killed, based on their race, even though they are commonly considered "white" by society at large?

Quote
2. Other people (who understand whiteness to be a positive thing***) identify you as white. You benefit from increased goodwill, better treatment, more positive preconceptions, etc. Sure, if you don't meet that person's definition of "whiteness" you don't benefit. For those who do, however, suddenly birds appear and stars fall down from the sky.
Right, but if you have an accent, or a funny nose, these people won't give you these advantages. So in what sense are you really *white* except for your skin color?

Quote
And yes, sure, scholarship/demographers has some impact on how people define whiteness (seriously, check out Ngai's Impossible Subjects if you haven't, I think you'd find it really interesting). It's certainly been an evolving concept. That doesn't change the fact that when other people identify you as this evolving, amorphous "white", you benefit. When you**** identify yourself as "white", you benefit. (And please please please do not attempt to discredit these statements by talking about some guy who experiences it differently - I'm not saying this occurs for everyone in the same way, etc. etc., all the standard disclaimers I've been using throughout). And there is enough of a general sense of what whiteness means, and we have enough interactions in our lifetime, that one can pretty well identify those people who will, on the whole, benefit.
I'll make sure to check out that book, but I kind of take afront to the bolded. It is specifically the minority whites who face these kinds of issues. If you don't want me to mention minority whites, then we just simply have nothing to talk about.

Quote
Finally, as to your last paragraph to MBW: That has not been the contention at all as this conversation has developed. I understand your frustration at that, but when I asked before that we set that aside for now, what I meant was that it would be swell if you not let that contention, which was not made by myself or anyone continuing this conversation (as far as I know), color the argument.
It's hard not to when I have been trying to say all along that while blacks are certainly underprivileged in this society, there are plenty of whites who are similarly underprivileged. And by claiming that some sort of universal privilege belongs to all whites in this country, we are making the exact kind of gross over-generalization that leads to people assuming that all whites start at "third base" and that the struggles of whites are somehow illegitimate, and we should denigrate them by sarcastically calling them "hard-lifers".

Do you not see how the assertion that Whites are Privileged leads other people to say that - therefore, anyone who claims to have suffered discrimination as a white is full of poo and a "Hard Lifer".
Quote
P.S. I've been called a Communist too! An America-hating one!
I know you mean this as a joke but...

 I have been called that in your context, but when it happens to my mom, who worked her ass off and risked her life and freedom to escape communism, simply because she can't stop rolling her "r's" I kind of get a little bit upset.


****General you: yes, I know, you live in a basement. I'm living in a basement this summer! That Basement Privilege is awesome, don't you think? (that was a joke)Nah dood it sucks. Mine flooded earlier this week. :( Never live underground if you can avoid it!  ;)
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 07, 2008, 08:46:54 PM
So much for the cuddlefest.  On to round 1,453,967.  Ding.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 08:48:05 PM
So much for the cuddlefest.  On to round 1,453,967.  Ding.

Dude, he's invested in not getting it. So I'm not getting into it again.

I'm-a guess Cady feels the same way. J might have more patience. But perhaps not.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 08:50:09 PM
Yeah. Okay.

For fucks sake.

Consider my towel thrown in.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 07, 2008, 08:52:17 PM
So much for the cuddlefest.  On to round 1,453,967.  Ding.

Dude, he's invested in not getting it. So I'm not getting into it again.

I'm-a guess Cady feels the same way. J might have more patience. But perhaps not.

I'd throw mine in, but they're all in the laundry (too many kids with stomach virii...ick...)

The floor is your's, Bear.  It's been interesting.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 07, 2008, 08:52:28 PM

To limit racial dialogue only to skin color, is to disregard the reality of how "irregular" features can create discrimination even for people with white skin.



I'm going to make it very, very, very clear here right now that this is not what is being done in my argument.  I used "skin color" because it's convenient, and because "white privilege", specifically, is mostly related to this feature.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 08:55:11 PM

To limit racial dialogue only to skin color, is to disregard the reality of how "irregular" features can create discrimination even for people with white skin.



I'm going to make it very, very, very clear here right now that this is not what is being done in my argument.  I used "skin color" because it's convenient, and because "white privilege", specifically, is mostly related to this feature.

I understand what you are saying J - I was addressing Cady's post specifically.

To others: I responded to Cady's post not because I want to continue this madness, but because I told her I would. I'm as willing to leave this be as the next guy. I have said what I needed to say. Those who were willing to listen have heard me. Peace to all of you!
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 07, 2008, 08:56:44 PM
So much for the cuddlefest.  On to round 1,453,967.  Ding.

Dude, he's invested in not getting it. So I'm not getting into it again.

I'm-a guess Cady feels the same way. J might have more patience. But perhaps not.


You clearly have not met me IRL.

::suffers from ADHD and Tourette's::
::has only ever read about "patience" in books::
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 08:59:50 PM
For the record, I didn't (nor have I ever in my life) limit(ed) racial dialogue only to skin color.

I don't even want to know what you think I've been arguing.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 07, 2008, 09:01:17 PM
Now I'm kinda sad, as it's been rather fun hanging with the 1/2/3Lers.  Sniff.  :'(
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 07, 2008, 09:04:42 PM
For the record, I didn't, nor have I ever in my life, limit racial dialogue only to skin color.

I don't even want to know what you think I've been arguing.
::Sigh:: I understand that YOU grasp this concept, Cady. But

1) Most people do not.
2) The federal government does not.
3) State governments do not.
4) Educational authorities do not.

You don't see the impact of lack of recognition could have on a URW group?

Edit - Scratch that. I think you do. You have shown sensitivity to the complexity I am talking about. I'm tired of fighting this fight. As I said before, peace to you and all the others.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 09:33:45 PM
So much for the cuddlefest.  On to round 1,453,967.  Ding.

Dude, he's invested in not getting it. So I'm not getting into it again.

I'm-a guess Cady feels the same way. J might have more patience. But perhaps not.


You clearly have not met me IRL.

::suffers from ADHD and Tourette's::
::has only ever read about "patience" in books::


Well, you were basically a kindergarten teacher in here on the patience scale.

I don't know if you know this, but what I'm doing is denying your lived experience as a person with ADHD and Tourette's. It's because I'm a bigot.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 07, 2008, 09:36:57 PM
So much for the cuddlefest.  On to round 1,453,967.  Ding.

Dude, he's invested in not getting it. So I'm not getting into it again.

I'm-a guess Cady feels the same way. J might have more patience. But perhaps not.


You clearly have not met me IRL.

::suffers from ADHD and Tourette's::
::has only ever read about "patience" in books::


Well, you were basically a kindergarten teacher in here on the patience scale.

I don't know if you know this, but what I'm doing is denying your lived experience as a person with ADHD and Tourette's. It's because I'm a bigot.


 :D

I want to make more in-jokes, but I honestly didn't think Bearly was too ridiculous (for the most part), so I don't want to stir the pot.

Yet.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 07, 2008, 09:51:52 PM
Hey, it's almost tomorrow.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 07, 2008, 10:16:22 PM
Is this where we all have oral sex?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: t... on April 07, 2008, 11:21:22 PM
::wishes for Miss P, red., and the Captain to show up to enhance the fun::

::thinks J is an extremely sweet, cuddly, patient dude who is often forgetful, and/or neglectful of his duties as a friend::

::decides not to watch the late night orgy::
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 08, 2008, 01:42:59 AM
::wishes for Miss P, red., and the Captain to show up to enhance the fun::

::thinks J is an extremely sweet, cuddly, patient dude who is often forgetful, and/or neglectful of his duties as a friend::

::decides not to watch the late night orgy::


I am neither.  Maybe a little neglectful.  You're on a short list of people that deserve long PMs, so quit bugging!   :D
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: goaliechica on April 08, 2008, 02:03:02 AM
I believe I had this same argument (roughly) about standards of professionalism in SFLSD.


In fairness, although I did not weigh in on that debate at the time (I don't think), there is a not an irreconcilable difference between acknowledging that the standard is kind of screwed up and arbitrary, and acknowledging the fact that someone has to follow it in certain situations because that's jus the way it is. They are, in fact, different arguments. You can rail all you want against the fact that the standard of a suit is stupid and arbitrary, but you and everyone else still has to wear one under certain circumstances, if you want to be taken seriously in certain contexts. The question of whether one has to appreciate the aesthetics of a suit, or whether a nicer, more expensive suit "means" something are subsets of the fact that people have to wear certain arbitrary dress in certain contexts, and yes it's kind of dumb, but that doesn't mean it's not true. 

I don't think that most of those who are arguing that the suit standard has problematic origins would counsel an individual to intentionally fly in the face of those standards just to make a point, especially when the stake are high.  All power to you if that's what you want to do, but it's not going to be very effective in society as it currently is.

ETA: This really doesm't matter, of course. I just thought tj. was sneaking in a cheap shot  :P
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: t... on April 08, 2008, 07:56:29 AM
I don't think that was exactly what the argument was about, though.

But to be fair, the argument presented in this thread isn't what the argument was about either (though I think it lends weight to the point I was trying to make).

And I don't disagree with you here.

/beating a dead horse.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: MahlerGrooves on April 08, 2008, 08:16:37 AM
Cady, I need to figure out a way to know you are so I can say hi at Penn next year!
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 08, 2008, 08:42:27 PM
This doesn't help my point at all, but it was definately interesting, and in light of the debate that took place here, I wanted to link to it:

http://mediationchannel.com/2008/04/06/a-video-game-tests-racial-bias-and-the-willingness-to-pull-the-trigger/

It's a UChi study about how racial bias affects police officers in their instant decision making. The experiment can actually be performed at home. It only takes a few minutes to complete. If you have a minute, give it a try - I think it's an excellent study.

FWIW, my scores for blacks and whites were very, very close, but the numbers on my initial run were slightly biased to white.

I maintain that some of this bias can be attributed to the way the most of the blacks in the pictured were dressed vis-a-vis the whites, and the fact that the images are very small, and the decisions need to be made very quickly - so it's much easier to identify a dark object against a bright background rather than against a dark background (meaning the small divergence in my scores is not necessarily caused by bias but by other factors); but I will admit that the implications of subconscious racial bias are undeniable.

I would like to see this experiment performed by actual trained police officers.

Let me know what you guys think.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: naturallybeyoutiful on April 09, 2008, 06:59:46 PM
Let me know what you guys think.
I actually think you've summed things up quite nicely when you said:

I will admit that the implications of subconscious racial bias are undeniable.


Now consider how this "subconcious racial bias" might adversely impact someone's life if he, through absolutely no fault of his own, found himself subject to such bias at every turn.  Just take the next few minutes and imagine his world. Step in his shoes for a bit.  What would life look like where more likely than not, every interaction you have with...your doctor, your teacher, your professor, your mechanic, your co-worker, your  car salesman, your mortgage broker, your bank teller, your real estate agent, your supervisor, your subordinate, your dentist, your neighbor, your waitress, your store clerk, your attorney, your cab driver, your dry-cleaner, your handyman, your loan officer....with that government bureaucrat, that bartender, that politician, that guy sitting beside you on public transportation, that woman clutching her purse as your get within 10 ft. of her on a public street, that journalist, you name it...was subtly tainted with this "subconcious racial bias" you described? 

Then consider how this effect is compounded because your family, your friends, your neighborhood, your "section of town" are all subject to this same "bias."  Consider even what hundreds of years of this kind of subconcious bias would do to the psyche and life chances of generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after...etc. of people who look like you. And only because they look like you. 

Subconcious racial bias is real.  And it's not innocuous.  It affected you in one quick simulation where the stakes arguably aren't very high.  But the history of racial bias in this nation shows that it doesn't stop with just those small, insignificant interactions or situations.  Furthermore, even if it were limited to only these seemingly "small things", when you consider the overwhelming majority of the US population going about their daily lives exhibiting racial bias in "small things" -- it quickly becomes apparent that the effect of such bias is not a small matter at all!!!!  I'm going to be honest.  In a perfect world, there'd be no need for AA. There'd be no need for the 13th Amendment, the 14th Amendment, the 15th Amendment, Brown v. Board, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and non-discrimination clauses at the end of your job, housing, or academic applications.  There'd be no need for this thread in a perfect world, let alone some simulation to test race-based bias and willingness to pull a trigger on black images.  But this, I'm afraid, is not a perfect world.  But it's the one that our choices have shaped.  Similarly, AA is not a perfect solution. But it is one that we've made to address some issues that we ourselves--consciously and sub-consciously--have created.  So any discussion on AA should be rich and thoughtful. Even pro-AA camps are likely okay with one pointing out weaknesses and raise counter-points.  What people like me take issue with is a refusal to acknowledge the very realities (like "white privilege" and "subconscious racial bias") that made it necessary in the first place.  If the attitudes and prejudices that helped create the structural, social, political milieu in which you and I have been born into have not really changed all that much, then it's disingenious and unjust to  repeal/assail mitigating measures without (a) acknowledging of the complexity of the issue and (b) strategically planning to deal with the factors that would continue to work against people of color in every aspect of their daily lives. 

Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 09, 2008, 07:45:05 PM
Let me know what you guys think.
I actually think you've summed things up quite nicely when you said:

I will admit that the implications of subconscious racial bias are undeniable.


Now consider how this "subconcious racial bias" might adversely impact someone's life if he, through absolutely no fault of his own, found himself subject to such bias at every turn.  Just take the next few minutes and imagine his world. Step in his shoes for a bit.  What would life look like where more likely than not, every interaction you have with...your doctor, your teacher, your professor, your mechanic, your co-worker, your  car salesman, your mortgage broker, your bank teller, your real estate agent, your supervisor, your subordinate, your dentist, your neighbor, your waitress, your store clerk, your attorney, your cab driver, your dry-cleaner, your handyman, your loan officer....with that government bureaucrat, that bartender, that politician, that guy sitting beside you on public transportation, that woman clutching her purse as your get within 10 ft. of her on a public street, that journalist, you name it...was subtly tainted with this "subconcious racial bias" you described? 

Then consider how this effect is compounded because your family, your friends, your neighborhood, your "section of town" are all subject to this same "bias."  Consider even what hundreds of years of this kind of subconcious bias would do to the psyche and life chances of generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after...etc. of people who look like you. And only because they look like you. 

Subconcious racial bias is real.  And it's not innocuous.  It affected you in one quick simulation where the stakes arguably aren't very high.  But the history of racial bias in this nation shows that it doesn't stop with just those small, insignificant interactions or situations.  Furthermore, even if it were limited to only these seemingly "small things", when you consider the overwhelming majority of the US population going about their daily lives exhibiting racial bias in "small things" -- it quickly becomes apparent that the effect of such bias is not a small matter at all!!!!  I'm going to be honest.  In a perfect world, there'd be no need for AA. There'd be no need for the 13th Amendment, the 14th Amendment, the 15th Amendment, Brown v. Board, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and non-discrimination clauses at the end of your job, housing, or academic applications.  There'd be no need for this thread in a perfect world, let alone some simulation to test race-based bias and willingness to pull a trigger on black images.  But this, I'm afraid, is not a perfect world.  But it's the one that our choices have shaped.  Similarly, AA is not a perfect solution. But it is one that we've made to address some issues that we ourselves--consciously and sub-consciously--have created.  So any discussion on AA should be rich and thoughtful. Even pro-AA camps are likely okay with one pointing out weaknesses and raise counter-points.  What people like me take issue with is a refusal to acknowledge the very realities (like "white privilege" and "subconscious racial bias") that made it necessary in the first place.  If the attitudes and prejudices that helped create the structural, social, political milieu in which you and I have been born into have not really changed all that much, then it's disingenious and unjust to  repeal/assail mitigating measures without (a) acknowledging of the complexity of the issue and (b) strategically planning to deal with the factors that would continue to work against people of color in every aspect of their daily lives. 




Uhh...


To be fair, Bearly's repeatedly emphasized that he's pro-AA.


I don't really understand this long digression, nat.  I mean, it's all true, but unless you can pull this back to "white privilege" somehow, you're not making any claims with which Bearly would disagree in this thread.  He's not denying that discrimination occurs for minorities.  He's claiming that certain people who are classified as "white" are also discriminated against, often in similar ways, and that therefore "white privilege" doesn't really exist at a micro level.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: filet o' fish on April 09, 2008, 10:11:01 PM
Like Canadians here in America?

 ???
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 10, 2008, 01:23:35 PM
Let me know what you guys think.
I actually think you've summed things up quite nicely when you said:

I will admit that the implications of subconscious racial bias are undeniable.


Now consider how this "subconcious racial bias" might adversely impact someone's life if he, through absolutely no fault of his own, found himself subject to such bias at every turn.  Just take the next few minutes and imagine his world. Step in his shoes for a bit.  What would life look like where more likely than not, every interaction you have with...your doctor, your teacher, your professor, your mechanic, your co-worker, your  car salesman, your mortgage broker, your bank teller, your real estate agent, your supervisor, your subordinate, your dentist, your neighbor, your waitress, your store clerk, your attorney, your cab driver, your dry-cleaner, your handyman, your loan officer....with that government bureaucrat, that bartender, that politician, that guy sitting beside you on public transportation, that woman clutching her purse as your get within 10 ft. of her on a public street, that journalist, you name it...was subtly tainted with this "subconcious racial bias" you described? 

Then consider how this effect is compounded because your family, your friends, your neighborhood, your "section of town" are all subject to this same "bias."  Consider even what hundreds of years of this kind of subconcious bias would do to the psyche and life chances of generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after generation after...etc. of people who look like you. And only because they look like you. 

Subconcious racial bias is real.  And it's not innocuous.  It affected you in one quick simulation where the stakes arguably aren't very high.  But the history of racial bias in this nation shows that it doesn't stop with just those small, insignificant interactions or situations.  Furthermore, even if it were limited to only these seemingly "small things", when you consider the overwhelming majority of the US population going about their daily lives exhibiting racial bias in "small things" -- it quickly becomes apparent that the effect of such bias is not a small matter at all!!!!  I'm going to be honest.  In a perfect world, there'd be no need for AA. There'd be no need for the 13th Amendment, the 14th Amendment, the 15th Amendment, Brown v. Board, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and non-discrimination clauses at the end of your job, housing, or academic applications.  There'd be no need for this thread in a perfect world, let alone some simulation to test race-based bias and willingness to pull a trigger on black images.  But this, I'm afraid, is not a perfect world.  But it's the one that our choices have shaped.  Similarly, AA is not a perfect solution. But it is one that we've made to address some issues that we ourselves--consciously and sub-consciously--have created.  So any discussion on AA should be rich and thoughtful. Even pro-AA camps are likely okay with one pointing out weaknesses and raise counter-points.  What people like me take issue with is a refusal to acknowledge the very realities (like "white privilege" and "subconscious racial bias") that made it necessary in the first place.  If the attitudes and prejudices that helped create the structural, social, political milieu in which you and I have been born into have not really changed all that much, then it's disingenious and unjust to  repeal/assail mitigating measures without (a) acknowledging of the complexity of the issue and (b) strategically planning to deal with the factors that would continue to work against people of color in every aspect of their daily lives. 




Uhh...


To be fair, Bearly's repeatedly emphasized that he's pro-AA.


I don't really understand this long digression, nat.  I mean, it's all true, but unless you can pull this back to "white privilege" somehow, you're not making any claims with which Bearly would disagree in this thread.  He's not denying that discrimination occurs for minorities.  He's claiming that certain people who are classified as "white" are also discriminated against, often in similar ways, and that therefore "white privilege" doesn't really exist at a micro level.

Credited. TY, J.

To make a loose analogy, if I had actually shot the 47 white people and 48 black people who I killed in the experiment, clearly, there would be a mild racial bias on my part... BUT... I don't think the 47 white people who I killed would feel very privileged as they lay on the ground bleeding their guts out.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Nemorino on April 10, 2008, 03:22:15 PM

hahahahhahahahaha

Fine. If he isn't hypothetical, tell me what his name is and how to contact him. If you can't do that, then he's hypothetical, because you made him, and specifically him, up--regardless of the fact that there are white refugees in the US. Dumbass.

I am not taking a side on this particular issue (white privilege) - both of ya'll are beating the hell out of this dead horse for sure.

I'd just like to point out the irony in this ridiculous request though. Can YOU provide YOUR name and contact? Perhaps this HLS student with a 176 and 3.71 GPA from HYP (not to mention a potty mouth and too much time in her hands) is an invention of someone with insecurity issues. That's it! You must be Aleksey Garber!
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: yoyodawg on April 10, 2008, 04:06:57 PM

hahahahhahahahaha

Fine. If he isn't hypothetical, tell me what his name is and how to contact him. If you can't do that, then he's hypothetical, because you made him, and specifically him, up--regardless of the fact that there are white refugees in the US. Dumbass.

I am not taking a side on this particular issue (white privilege) - both of ya'll are beating the hell out of this dead horse for sure.

I'd just like to point out the irony in this ridiculous request though. Can YOU provide YOUR name and contact? Perhaps this HLS student with a 176 and 3.71 GPA from HYP (not to mention a potty mouth and too much time in her hands) is an invention of someone with insecurity issues. That's it! You must be Aleksey Garber!

Its been my contention all along that everyone related to this debate (including myself) are giant homos for even engaging in it.

What really bothers people about the other AA, Alcoholics Anonymous? What bothers me about it is the fact that quiting is for losers. If you make a choice you should stick with it. Be the best alcoholic you can be. Don't give up when liver failure is clearly within your grasp.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 10, 2008, 04:15:23 PM
::peeks into thread::

Is it safe?


::beats::
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 10, 2008, 04:45:26 PM

hahahahhahahahaha

Fine. If he isn't hypothetical, tell me what his name is and how to contact him. If you can't do that, then he's hypothetical, because you made him, and specifically him, up--regardless of the fact that there are white refugees in the US. Dumbass.

I am not taking a side on this particular issue (white privilege) - both of ya'll are beating the hell out of this dead horse for sure.

I'd just like to point out the irony in this ridiculous request though. Can YOU provide YOUR name and contact? Perhaps this HLS student with a 176 and 3.71 GPA from HYP (not to mention a potty mouth and too much time in her hands) is an invention of someone with insecurity issues. That's it! You must be Aleksey Garber!

And...we stopped quite some time ago

Well done.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 10, 2008, 08:58:28 PM

hahahahhahahahaha

Fine. If he isn't hypothetical, tell me what his name is and how to contact him. If you can't do that, then he's hypothetical, because you made him, and specifically him, up--regardless of the fact that there are white refugees in the US. Dumbass.

I am not taking a side on this particular issue (white privilege) - both of ya'll are beating the hell out of this dead horse for sure.

I'd just like to point out the irony in this ridiculous request though. Can YOU provide YOUR name and contact? Perhaps this HLS student with a 176 and 3.71 GPA from HYP (not to mention a potty mouth and too much time in her hands) is an invention of someone with insecurity issues. That's it! You must be Aleksey Garber!

Nice, coming into a thread multiple days late. I can assure you I'm real. Real, and spectacular. Also, my GPA went up after I applied to law school. SUCKA.

Also, I believe the idiom is "too much time ON her hands," but I do thank you for playing.

So, by name-dropping the little known version of Vayner's name, you've implied that you're either a Yalie or someone who reads Ivygate more than is healthful. Either way, you're trying to impress me, but dollface, honey...it's not working.

Also, registering my objection (as is my wont) to this, for the usual and obvious reasons:
Its been my contention all along that everyone related to this debate (including myself) are giant homos for even engaging in it.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 12, 2008, 10:07:51 AM
I find the question strangely worded.  I tend to think of WASPs as a distinct subcategory that is privileged socioeconomically.  This makes me think that they are actually less likely to be bothered by affirmative action than whites who are less well off.  Am I the only one who thought this at reading the question?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 12, 2008, 10:22:40 AM
I find the question strangely worded.  I tend to think of WASPs as a distinct subcategory that is privileged socioeconomically.  This makes me think that they are actually less likely to be bothered by affirmative action than whites who are less well off.  Am I the only one who thought this at reading the question?

shhh... don't ruin their masturbatory hatred...

I apologize.  I was just trying to get in on the action.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 12, 2008, 10:28:02 AM
I find the question strangely worded.  I tend to think of WASPs as a distinct subcategory that is privileged socioeconomically.  This makes me think that they are actually less likely to be bothered by affirmative action than whites who are less well off.  Am I the only one who thought this at reading the question?

shhh... don't ruin their masturbatory hatred...

I apologize.  I was just trying to get in on the action.
A day late and a dollar short, but your initial post was right on.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 12, 2008, 10:29:23 AM
I find the question strangely worded.  I tend to think of WASPs as a distinct subcategory that is privileged socioeconomically.  This makes me think that they are actually less likely to be bothered by affirmative action than whites who are less well off.  Am I the only one who thought this at reading the question?

A) You're making a demographic leap there; WASP doesn't necessarily imply high SES.
B) Less-likely-to-have-issues-with-AA =/= do-not-have-issues-with-AA.
C) To take a stab at a possible answer: WASPs (and/or high-SES whites) are more psychologically invested in the idea that we live in a meritocracy, where good outcomes are the result of good character and hard work, and would be very upset by the notion that they didn't "earn" all the good things they have. Also related: just-world hypothesis, the naturalistic fallacy, and system-justification theory. This implicit attitude is often evident in the "It's not fair--just work hard and you'll get ahead--I didn't need a leg up" explicit critique of AA.

And if anyone tries to get on me for substantively answering a question just because "it's dead, omg, leave it alone," I will first of all beat you up and second of all steal your lunch money. You ask, [it shows up in my unreads,] I attempt to answer.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 12, 2008, 10:41:44 AM
Quote from: dashrashi link=topic=104083.msg2682270#msg2682270 date=1208017763[b
]
WASPs (and/or high-SES whites) are more psychologically invested in the idea that we live in a meritocracy,[/b] where good outcomes are the result of good character and hard work, and would be very upset by the notion that they didn't "earn" all the good things they have.
Not true in my experience. WASPs and other High-SES whites spend less time in direct market and other competition with with minorities, and so are not as directly impacted by AA and other programs that are designed to help minorities compete.

Example: If you have a spot at a top school because you were helped as a legacy admit, you are not likely to really be upset by AA. If, however, you don't have access to legacy admissions OR AA, you are at a competitive disadvantage, so you may have a personal stake in trying to end AA.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 12, 2008, 11:18:50 AM
Y'all. Did I say a word about relative feelings about AA as between low-SES whites and high-SES whites? No. I did not. I merely offered a set of reasons as to why high-SES whites might have a problem with AA. You haven't refuted those, merely repeated your intuition that low-SES whites are more likely to have a problem with AA than are high-SES whites. So, work harder at reading next time!

For high-SES whites (among others), being against AA is not about impact--it's about narratives and psychology.

As for waitlisted, you're making an unfounded assumption in your third to last sentence. Or at least one you haven't even remotely supported. But more to the point, it's not one that refutes anything I've said.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 12, 2008, 11:25:40 AM
Y'all. Did I say a word about relative feelings about AA as between low-SES whites and high-SES whites? No. I did not.
C) To take a stab at a possible answer: WASPs (and/or high-SES whites) are more psychologically invested in the idea that we live in a meritocracy, where good outcomes are the result of good character and hard work, and would be very upset by the notion that they didn't "earn" all the good things they have.

The bolded "more" reads like a term of relative comparison; since what precedes is the phrase "High-SES whites", it reads like a distinction between WASPs and/or High SES whites and Non-Wasps and Non-High-SES Whites.

Edit - Post-clarification, I see what you are getting at, I just would have worded it a little bit differently. You are right that for high-ses whites the challenge to AA seems more psychological/self-identity oriented than grounded in actual reality.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 12, 2008, 11:28:38 AM
I find the question strangely worded.  I tend to think of WASPs as a distinct subcategory that is privileged socioeconomically.  This makes me think that they are actually less likely to be bothered by affirmative action than whites who are less well off.  Am I the only one who thought this at reading the question?

A) You're making a demographic leap there; WASP doesn't necessarily imply high SES.
B) Less-likely-to-have-issues-with-AA =/= do-not-have-issues-with-AA.
C) To take a stab at a possible answer: WASPs (and/or high-SES whites) are more psychologically invested in the idea that we live in a meritocracy, where good outcomes are the result of good character and hard work, and would be very upset by the notion that they didn't "earn" all the good things they have. Also related: just-world hypothesis, the naturalistic fallacy, and system-justification theory. This implicit attitude is often evident in the "It's not fair--just work hard and you'll get ahead--I didn't need a leg up" explicit critique of AA.

And if anyone tries to get on me for substantively answering a question just because "it's dead, omg, leave it alone," I will first of all beat you up and second of all steal your lunch money. You ask, [it shows up in my unreads,] I attempt to answer.

As to A, I feel like even if a person was technically a WASP, you wouldn't refer to them that way unless they were relatively affluent.  Maybe that's just my perception, however.

As to B, I agree but I find it a little strange not to target the question toward those most likely to be bothered.

As to C, I can see that as a potential explanation but again, I would think that would be more than outweighed by the likelihood that people who are affluent and therefore more privileged would be less likely to hoard their privilege so jealously.  But you're probably right that if there is negative feeling there, that would be a possible explanation.  Though I think plain old fashioned racism, conscious or not, might be a simpler explanation.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: naturallybeyoutiful on April 12, 2008, 05:16:01 PM
I don't really understand this long digression, nat.  I mean, it's all true, but unless you can pull this back to "white privilege" somehow, you're not making any claims with which Bearly would disagree in this thread.  He's not denying that discrimination occurs for minorities.  He's claiming that certain people who are classified as "white" are also discriminated against, often in similar ways, and that therefore "white privilege" doesn't really exist at a micro level.

Points taken, Hairless.  I probably wasn't as clear as I could have been.  I guess my main point is that "privilege" is a relative term.  To say that a small minority of white people (e.g. an Eastern European immigrant) aren't as "privileged" as others (e.g. the "all-American" blonde-haired, blue-eyed set...a loaded term in itself, but I digress) and that the former don't enjoy the exact same perks as the latter does not, prove that the former has no white privilege on a micro level.  White privilege cannot be artifically constrained and measured as against only other blue-blooded white Americans; the benefits accruing from white privilege must be measured as against ALL Americans -- including the millions of non-whites (a term I generally don't use, but I will here just for ease) who will never, ever, ever experience it. 

There are certain realities of life that black people of EVERY socioeconomic status in EVERY city in EVERY state in EVERY region face simply by virtue of the melanin in their skin.  This is true today.  This was true at any and every day since our country's declaration of independence in 1775.  Heck, it was true when those first Africans stepped onto Jamestown shores in chains in 1607, more than a decade before the landing of the Mayflower!!!  The impact of white people's prejudices (or if it seems more palatable "subtle racial biases") had and continue to have very real effects on black people in this country -- physically, mentally, emotionally, economically, socially, politically, etc. How can we fix a problem if we can't identify and attack all the roots of the issue?  This subtle racial bias, and the corresponding white privilege that it engenders, is not costless.  It's not harmless.  And it's not limited to some special group of white people in this country either!

On the whole, black people deal with a host of issues and complications that will be different in both kind and degree than those with which even the "least privileged" white person that Bearly thinks up.  Undoubtedly, there will be commonality of experience between any historically oppressed minority groups and those -- white or otherwise -- who are not fully included in American society for whatever reason.  That notwithstanding, black people continue to deal with a host of issues that are uniquely thrust upon them alone (even subconsciously) by whites.

What's more, not reciprocally having to deal with these very issues is in itself a form of white privilege afforded to both the greatest and the least of people of European descent.  Not only do blacks have to deal with these manifestations of bias/privilege, but all who came before us and all who follow after deal with some varying manifestation of them as well.  Ignoring these issues...denying these issues...being indifferent toward these issues...perpetuating these issues...undesrvedly reaping the fruits of these issues...not having the added complication of what DuBois called "double consciousness"...each of these is, in itself, a form of white privilege.  Anyone who thinks that some significant proportion of whites receive no benefits with their whiteness--or relatedly, that some significant portion of blacks receive no detriment with their blackness--simply do not acknowledge the annals of human history.  More importantly, I'd venture to say that they don't really have any window into the every day lives of African-Americans (across all socio-economic classes) beyond (a) the nightly news, (b) music videos, and oh, yeah, (c) that "son/daughter of an engineer/financial analyst/professor who took [insert name of some white privilege beneficiary]'s seat at Harvard/Stanford/Yale." ::)  To know black people is to know otherwise. 

I really hope this post helps explains things a bit, and I hope people can see that I intend for it to be explanatory, not inflammatory.  Race is personal for so many, and it's not any easy discussion to have in "mixed" company.   ;)  In sum, I just hope I live to see the day when the majority of people in this country -- no matter their color -- can find enough common ground to start working toward effective solutions to achieve racial justice and full inclusion for all so-called "minorities."  Because life is not a zero-sum game, I believe that truly lifting the burdens on the "least of these" in any society ultimately works for the good of everyone. 

Anywho, lastly, I stumbled across this blog, and I think it's very insightful.  We've all heard of the Stuff White People Like blog.  Well, this one is, in my opinion, much more poignant and insightful: Stuff White People Do. http://stuffwhitepeopledo.blogspot.com  It's written by a white male, I believe, and it comes closer to critically examining life for blacks and whites in this country than most of anything I've seen or heard in a long time.  I think, read with an open mind, it'd touch on some of the underlying issues raised in threads like these.  Good food for thought!
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: yoyodawg on April 12, 2008, 05:32:57 PM
I don't really understand this long digression, nat.  I mean, it's all true, but unless you can pull this back to "white privilege" somehow, you're not making any claims with which Bearly would disagree in this thread.  He's not denying that discrimination occurs for minorities.  He's claiming that certain people who are classified as "white" are also discriminated against, often in similar ways, and that therefore "white privilege" doesn't really exist at a micro level.



What's more, not reciprocally having to deal with these very issues is in itself a form of white privilege afforded to both the greatest and the least of people of European descent.  Not only do blacks have to deal with these manifestations of bias/privilege, but all who came before us and all who follow after deal with some varying manifestation of them as well.  Ignoring these issues...denying these issues...being indifferent toward these issues...perpetuating these issues...undesrvedly reaping the fruits of these issues...not having the added complication of what DuBois called "double consciousness"...each of these is, in itself, a form of white privilege.  Anyone who thinks that some significant proportion of whites receive no benefits with their whiteness--or relatedly, that some significant portion of blacks receive no detriment with their blackness--simply do not acknowledge the annals of human history.  More importantly, I'd venture to say that they don't really have any window into the every day lives of African-Americans (across all socio-economic classes) beyond (a) the nightly news, (b) music videos, and oh, yeah, (c) that "son/daughter of an engineer/financial analyst/professor who took [insert name of some white privilege beneficiary]'s seat at Harvard/Stanford/Yale." ::)  To know black people is to know otherwise. 



White priviledge does exist. However, black victim mentality exists too. You just proved it.

Congrats.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 12, 2008, 05:36:49 PM
::smh at both of you::
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: MahlerGrooves on April 12, 2008, 05:40:32 PM
I found that blog offensive.  Really offensive. 
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: naturallybeyoutiful on April 12, 2008, 05:48:54 PM
White priviledge does exist. However, black victim mentality exists too. You just proved it.
Congrats.

Your post is unnecessary.  Anyone who has read my posts carefully (not just in this thread but across this board) knows that I'm the first to advocate personal responsibility and self-determination when it comes to blacks.  I have said that in this thread already if you take the time to search back.  The specific issue that I address in the immediately preceding response, however, was an attempt to correct what I feel like is a misconception, namely that there are some whites for whom no white privilege exists on a micro level.  This is the only point I'm addressing, as no one has previously contested my notion that black people must do what we've done at every age in our nation's history, stand up and help ourselves!  (Careful reading, in fact, would have helped you spot that I called white privilege one of many "roots"--plural as in more than ONE--of issues plaguing black America. This explicitly recognizes that there are others, and I have addressed these in my other posts in the thread and elsewhere around this board in the more than a year since I've been posting.)  

Furthermore, please be clear on one thing.  I am no victim!!!!!  I personally believe that Jesus Christ makes up for whatever shortcomings, inconsistencies, and failures I see in both myself and this system that whites have created for their unilateral benefit and enjoyment.  I am victorious in spite of the victimization that my people have suffered, and my life's mission is to help other people of color be able to say the same.  I do not accept your labels for me, and the day is long gone when whites will use their words to define who this black girl is and is not.  Your attempt to label me a victim because I attempt to shed light on points that others would rather deny (or perhaps, have the subconscious privilege of not having to accept) is not helpful to the discussion, and it reminds me why I rarely read/post in this board.  I prefer to have these kinds of discussions with people ready to face the bare naked truth about issues -- however uncomfortable they may be to confront.


I found that blog offensive.  Really offensive. 
Please share more about what you think.  I'm interested in hearing it, even if perhaps it should be spun off into a different thread.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: naturallybeyoutiful on April 12, 2008, 06:05:33 PM
I found that blog offensive.  Really offensive. 
Mahler, you haven't responded back yet, and since lightning keeps flashing into my room every few minutes, I'm going to shut my computer down.  I'm genuinely interested in knowing which posts offended you if we can have a civil, respectful discussion about them.  If you want to keep talking, write me back and let me know exactly what specific post bothered you and why exactly it did so.  I'll respond when I can.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: yoyodawg on April 12, 2008, 06:34:04 PM

On the whole, black people deal with a host of issues and complications that will be different in both kind and degree than those with which even the "least privileged" white person that Bearly thinks up.  Undoubtedly, there will be commonality of experience between any historically oppressed minority groups and those -- white or otherwise -- who are not fully included in American society for whatever reason.  That notwithstanding, black people continue to deal with a host of issues that are uniquely thrust upon them alone (even subconsciously) by whites.


So you're telling me that the above type of thinking doesn't perpetuate a victim mentality? Its for this type of reasoning that I can't take people like you seriously.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 12, 2008, 06:41:11 PM
I don't really understand this long digression, nat.  I mean, it's all true, but unless you can pull this back to "white privilege" somehow, you're not making any claims with which Bearly would disagree in this thread.  He's not denying that discrimination occurs for minorities.  He's claiming that certain people who are classified as "white" are also discriminated against, often in similar ways, and that therefore "white privilege" doesn't really exist at a micro level.

Points taken, Hairless.  I probably wasn't as clear as I could have been.  I guess my main point is that "privilege" is a relative term.  To say that a small minority of white people (e.g. an Eastern European immigrant) aren't as "privileged" as others (e.g. the "all-American" blonde-haired, blue-eyed set...a loaded term in itself, but I digress) and that the former don't enjoy the exact same perks as the latter does not, prove that the former has no white privilege on a micro level.  White privilege cannot be artifically constrained and measured as against only other blue-blooded white Americans; the benefits accruing from white privilege must be measured as against ALL Americans -- including the millions of non-whites (a term I generally don't use, but I will here just for ease) who will never, ever, ever experience it. 

There are certain realities of life that black people of EVERY socioeconomic status in EVERY city in EVERY state in EVERY region face simply by virtue of the melanin in their skin.  This is true today.  This was true at any and every day since our country's declaration of independence in 1775.  Heck, it was true when those first Africans stepped onto Jamestown shores in chains in 1607, more than a decade before the landing of the Mayflower!!!  The impact of white people's prejudices (or if it seems more palatable "subtle racial biases") had and continue to have very real effects on black people in this country -- physically, mentally, emotionally, economically, socially, politically, etc. How can we fix a problem if we can't identify and attack all the roots of the issue?  This subtle racial bias, and the corresponding white privilege that it engenders, is not costless.  It's not harmless.  And it's not limited to some special group of white people in this country either!

On the whole, black people deal with a host of issues and complications that will be different in both kind and degree than those with which even the "least privileged" white person that Bearly thinks up.  Undoubtedly, there will be commonality of experience between any historically oppressed minority groups and those -- white or otherwise -- who are not fully included in American society for whatever reason.  That notwithstanding, black people continue to deal with a host of issues that are uniquely thrust upon them alone (even subconsciously) by whites.

What's more, not reciprocally having to deal with these very issues is in itself a form of white privilege afforded to both the greatest and the least of people of European descent.  Not only do blacks have to deal with these manifestations of bias/privilege, but all who came before us and all who follow after deal with some varying manifestation of them as well.  Ignoring these issues...denying these issues...being indifferent toward these issues...perpetuating these issues...undesrvedly reaping the fruits of these issues...not having the added complication of what DuBois called "double consciousness"...each of these is, in itself, a form of white privilege.  Anyone who thinks that some significant proportion of whites receive no benefits with their whiteness--or relatedly, that some significant portion of blacks receive no detriment with their blackness--simply do not acknowledge the annals of human history.  More importantly, I'd venture to say that they don't really have any window into the every day lives of African-Americans (across all socio-economic classes) beyond (a) the nightly news, (b) music videos, and oh, yeah, (c) that "son/daughter of an engineer/financial analyst/professor who took [insert name of some white privilege beneficiary]'s seat at Harvard/Stanford/Yale." ::)  To know black people is to know otherwise. 

I really hope this post helps explains things a bit, and I hope people can see that I intend for it to be explanatory, not inflammatory.  Race is personal for so many, and it's not any easy discussion to have in "mixed" company.   ;)  In sum, I just hope I live to see the day when the majority of people in this country -- no matter their color -- can find enough common ground to start working toward effective solutions to achieve racial justice and full inclusion for all so-called "minorities."  Because life is not a zero-sum game, I believe that truly lifting the burdens on the "least of these" in any society ultimately works for the good of everyone. 

Anywho, lastly, I stumbled across this blog, and I think it's very insightful.  We've all heard of the Stuff White People Like blog.  Well, this one is, in my opinion, much more poignant and insightful: Stuff White People Do. http://stuffwhitepeopledo.blogspot.com  It's written by a white male, I believe, and it comes closer to critically examining life for blacks and whites in this country than most of anything I've seen or heard in a long time.  I think, read with an open mind, it'd touch on some of the underlying issues raised in threads like these.  Good food for thought!
This post deserves a full response, which I will provide when I have the time. (on monday)

But I will say this - The issues you seem to have are with "Black Underprivilege", NOT "White Privilege". There is a distinction and it's an important one.

Another interesting blog, BTW: http://whiteprivilege.com/

Also run by a white guy, and also absurdly racist against his own people. See the secondary title for more details.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 12, 2008, 07:07:39 PM
Your attempt to label me a victim because I attempt to shed light on points that others would rather deny (or perhaps, have the subconscious privilege of not having to accept) is not helpful to the discussion, and it reminds me why I rarely read/post in this board.
Your attempt to label me "privileged" despite my actual life experiences - which have been anything but, based on nothing except for the color of skin that I was born with is equally offensive. I hope you consider that.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: mbw on April 12, 2008, 07:30:33 PM
I agree with most of what you've said, Beau, but I have a very hard time swallowing the "AAs have it the worst".  There should be no competition here.  Racism against Indians and Latinos, as well as other non-white minorities, may be different (slavery vs. expulsion vs. genocide) both over time and place, but I don't believe they can be quantified into some type of racism heirarchy.  I do believe that AAs benefit more from discussions of racism, as is evident from this thread, Obama's speech, media, academia, blah, blah, blah.  People say things about NDNs, Latinos, Arabs and Asians which they would never says publicly about AAs, because the awareness is still just not there, and they're not called on it.  Last I checked, the Washington NFL teams was still called the R*dskins and undocumented immigrants, "illegal".  Imus loses his job, but Lou Dobbs and Michael Savage are still on the air.  A Democratic presidential candidate couldn't even bring himself last week to say that Indians are protected by the same laws which protect all other Americans.  And if you look here, on LSN and other law boards, its pretty clear that all URMness is not treated equally by law schools.

Yes, AAs have had it tough and continue to do so.  But last I checked, a greater number of NDNs lived in poverty and had fewer millionaires, despite all the hullabaloo over tribal casinos, per capita, than any other ethnic/racial group in this country.  So perhaps we shouldn't be singling any one group out as bearing the brunt of white privilege.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: MahlerGrooves on April 12, 2008, 08:47:37 PM
I found that blog offensive.  Really offensive. 
Mahler, you haven't responded back yet, and since lightning keeps flashing into my room every few minutes, I'm going to shut my computer down.  I'm genuinely interested in knowing which posts offended you if we can have a civil, respectful discussion about them.  If you want to keep talking, write me back and let me know exactly what specific post bothered you and why exactly it did so.  I'll respond when I can.

Hey there!  Sorry!  My fiancee and I went to dinner, and she was rushing me out the door when I made the first post, so I couldn't write more (she says I have an LSD addiction  ;) ).  Now for why I'm offended by the blog:

First, let me just say that even the "StuffWhitePeopleLike" blog bothers me, and it would bother me if it was written by a white guy, black guy, asian guy, or alien from the planet Goraph.

The whole tenor of the blog bothers me because it does exactly what programs such as AA try to eliminate:  it makes generalizations based on race.  Stereotypes are bad across the board because they generalize and short-change the individual at the expense of having a ready-made generalization that will, in this case, get a few laughs.  If it is improper to stereotype black people, then it is improper to stereotype white people.  Even positive stereotypes (ie Jews are good with money [the SO gets this a lot as she is Jewish]) have a negative impact on a culture.  Either it is okay to stereotype EVERY racial group or it is okay to stereotype NO racial group.

Second, I take offense to some of the posts in particular.  The "Trust the police" topic is particularly troubling.  While I understand that it speaks to larger issues concerning racial relations with power and presumption of innocence sometimes depending on race, it seems unnecessary to classify this as something to made fun of that white people do.  I trust the police - black, white, or brown - because they are the protectors.  I have had negative experiences with individual officers, but that is not consistent with most officers.  It seems to devalue their integrity as a whole, and then we are back to the whole stereotyping thing.

The "Play the Race Card" one is also troubling, ESPECIALLY since this is something of which BLACKS AND WHITES are guilty.  While there are definitely white people who play the race card (ie "I didn't get into HLS 'cause I'm white, but if I was black, my 135 would get me in!), there are also blacks who play it.  For one VERY outlandish example (done on purpose because of its being extreme), look at Al Sharpton's outcry against the Duke lacrosse players.  He claimed that they were getting off because they were white and that when a white man rapes a black woman, nobody cares (I am over generalizing, yes).  This is the race card.  The race card is saying that, all things equal, the only reason a certain action was taken was because of the race of one or more of those involved.  For a more distant example, look at Mark Furman's (spelling is prob wrong) being asked if he ever used "the N word" during the OJ trial.  I have never heard of a case in which a black witness was asked if he used racial slurs against whites.

I think the bottom line for me is a sense of double standard.  If someone made a blog called "Stuff Black People Like" and spouted about friend chicken, orange soda, wearing pants 4 waist sizes too big, etc., there would be cries of racism, cries of stereotyping, and cries for the site to be taken down.  Same if there was a site called "Stuff Black People Do" which was littered with things like "Get into school with lower scores," "Speak improper English," and "Hate White People." (Disclaimer - those are hypothetical examples, not things I actually think.  Used to make a point.).  I just feel that it is either okay to speak this way about EVERYONE or about NO-ONE.

It just makes me sad.  I think the majority of the country is trying to heal this racial tension, but I do not think it will ever happen as long as blogs like these continue placing people in little boxes based on race.  If the argument is that people are individuals with each having their own good and bad, INDEPENDENT OF RACE, then these blogs serve only to divert us from a world in which that can happen.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: MahlerGrooves on April 12, 2008, 09:00:14 PM
http://stuffebplike.com/

http://blog.stuffblackpeoplelove.com/

http://stuffblackpeoplehate.com/

just sayin'

But I am offended by THOSE too.  Too much separating people.  Too much focusing on why we are different.  Too much perpetuating the racial divide that has plagued us.

I think it's time to focus on how we are all alike.  I really do.  In my mind, it's the ONLY way we all heal.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 12, 2008, 09:01:11 PM
If it is improper to stereotype black people, then it is improper to stereotype white people. ... Either it is okay to stereotype EVERY racial group or it is okay to stereotype NO racial group.


To ignore some of your other points for the moment, I'm coming around these days to fundamentally disagree with the above as a functional matter (and not on some perfectly abstract moral level). This gets back to the power argument I believe I brought up earlier--it's less problematic, in my view, to stereotype white people, because white people BY AND LARGE BEARLY, JESUS H, hold power in American society. Whereas other groups don't, and stereotypes hurt them more. Likewise, worth noting who gets which stereotypes--do they reinforce power structures (like "trusting the police," given that the police are, literally, the police force of our society, and so, buying into that means that you're empowered enough to trust that the police work for you and not against you, like how white people are)?

Power. Power power power. Perhaps on some platonic-ideal level, we wouldn't stereotype at all. But here we are, and our brains are our brains, and they are lazy, and they use knowledge structures like stereotypes to save time and mental energy. So if we're working against our own neurology, it's an uphill battle, and I'd like to use my resources wisely--focus on eradicating the stereotypes that hurt the disempowered, and leave the ones that reinforce the empowered for another day, in the theory that we can't point to an actual harm beyond "You're not seeing me as an individual snowflake, which is upsetting and non-perfect" when it comes to stereotyping the powerful. Also, the powerful seem to be doing okay for themselves, so I'd have them hold tight for a while, while I use my resources where they're needed most.

Oh, and you:
Oh God, YES! Beat me some more, you twisted fuckers!

Your shtick ain't nearly as cute as you think it is. Sad, that.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 12, 2008, 09:06:00 PM
dashrashi, I agree with your general point of view, but I'd like to get your opinion on an issue that I don't think you've addressed.  Do you think that stereotyping white people might lead to a higher level of cohesion within whites as a racial group?  Even if the stereotypes themselves are not negative, if they reinforce the idea among "whites" that "whites" are a distinct group, then that might have serious negative long-term effects on minority groups.  Do you think this assessment is off and that it shouldn't be a particular concern?  I recognize that you've already pointed out that white stereotypes are less problematic, but I was just wondering what you thought about this particular question.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: MahlerGrooves on April 12, 2008, 09:09:35 PM
If it is improper to stereotype black people, then it is improper to stereotype white people. ... Either it is okay to stereotype EVERY racial group or it is okay to stereotype NO racial group.


To ignore some of your other points for the moment, I'm coming around these days to fundamentally disagree with the above as a functional matter (and not on some perfectly abstract moral level). This gets back to the power argument I believe I brought up earlier--it's less problematic, in my view, to stereotype white people, because white people BY AND LARGE BEARLY, JESUS H, hold power in American society. Whereas other groups don't, and stereotypes hurt them more. Likewise, worth noting who gets which stereotypes--do they reinforce power structures (like "trusting the police," given that the police are, literally, the police force of our society, and so, buying into that means that you're empowered enough to trust that the police work for you and not against you, like how white people are)?

Power. Power power power. Perhaps on some platonic-ideal level, we wouldn't stereotype at all. But here we are, and our brains are our brains, and they are lazy, and they use knowledge structures like stereotypes to save time and mental energy. So if we're working against our own neurology, it's an uphill battle, and I'd like to use my resources wisely--focus on eradicating the stereotypes that hurt the disempowered, and leave the ones that reinforce the empowered for another day, in the theory that we can't point to an actual harm beyond "You're not seeing me as an individual snowflake, which is upsetting and non-perfect" when it comes to stereotyping the powerful. Also, the powerful seem to be doing okay for themselves, so I'd have them hold tight for a while, while I use my resources where they're needed most.

Oh, and you:
Oh God, YES! Beat me some more, you twisted fuckers!

Your shtick ain't nearly as cute as you think it is. Sad, that.

Yes, you are right about the relative effect the stereotypes have, but it seems that we can at least all agree that stereotyping prevents us from seeing the individual.  While the forest-for-the-trees idea is great in law, in philosophy, in argument structure, it seems that the trees are important in getting to know people.  I'm sure there have been people who did not like black people simply because they never met any and then once they met one single person who defied the negative stereotype they may have had - BAM - there prejudice is on the way to being ended.

The power struggle argument is VERY credited, but I will still maintain that despite the relative differences in the effect of stereotypes, they are, overall, a damaging force.

I understand entirely what you are saying, and I respect it as a really valid argument.  I just see it differently.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: MahlerGrooves on April 12, 2008, 09:16:50 PM
Ok - I'm being summoned to bed.  And something about the WAY I'm being summoned tells me it will be quite a good idea to go without a fight.  Night all!  More from me in the AM.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 12, 2008, 09:21:07 PM
dashrashi, I agree with your general point of view, but I'd like to get your opinion on an issue that I don't think you've addressed.  Do you think that stereotyping white people might lead to a higher level of cohesion within whites as a racial group?  Even if the stereotypes themselves are not negative, if they reinforce the idea among "whites" that "whites" are a distinct group, then that might have serious negative long-term effects on minority groups.  Do you think this assessment is off and that it shouldn't be a particular concern?  I recognize that you've already pointed out that white stereotypes are less problematic, but I was just wondering what you thought about this particular question.

Hmm. I don't think it's a serious problem. You've got the warring forces of A) white people often forgetting/not thinking of themselves at times as having a "race" in current parlance, and B) people like Bearly screaming that white people cannot be cohered. And I don't think it's very different from the way we mush other "race" groups together. Leaving aside the great big "Hispanic" issue, it's only white privilege and vantage (imo) that keeps us from seeing "black" as just as internally diverse as "white." Intellectually, we know about the internal diversity, but for the purposes of discussing "race," we lump all "black" together. If there's no inherent problem with that, I'm not sure I see the inherent problem with doing the same for "white" for the same purposes, since it's my contention that that's the functional truth anyway, due to the often-visual nature of prejudice in our society.

If you're getting at the idea that, by insisting that "whiteness" is a thing, we will accidentally create more people who are into being "white" and thereby create more white supremacists...? Eh. I'm not convinced. I don't think that that's how the links would work out in practice, for a number of reasons relating to the strong insistence within the white community of internal diversity (see B above), and the specific politics of white supremacy, among other things.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: yoyodawg on April 12, 2008, 09:43:10 PM
White priviledge does exist. However, black victim mentality exists too. You just proved it.
Congrats.



Furthermore, please be clear on one thing.  I am no victim!!!!!  I personally believe that Jesus Christ makes up for whatever shortcomings, inconsistencies, and failures I see in both myself and this system that whites have created for their unilateral benefit and enjoyment.  I am victorious in spite of the victimization that my people have suffered, and my life's mission is to help other people of color be able to say the same.  I do not accept your labels for me, and the day is long gone when whites will use their words to define who this black girl is and is not.  Your attempt to label me a victim because I attempt to shed light on points that others would rather deny (or perhaps, have the subconscious privilege of not having to accept) is not helpful to the discussion, and it reminds me why I rarely read/post in this board.  I prefer to have these kinds of discussions with people ready to face the bare naked truth about issues -- however uncomfortable they may be to confront.


I found that blog offensive.  Really offensive. 
.
Please share more about what you think.  I'm interested in hearing it, even if perhaps it should be spun off into a different thread.

I find it interesting that everything you say in your previous posts is "white" versus "black." And I also find it interesting (and quite telling about your state of mind) that you constantly refer to "whites" as being people who control "blacks". Its this type of mentality which will keep people like you (victim mentality people)from ever moving past racism because you are in reality engaging in a subconcious form of racism.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 12, 2008, 10:00:04 PM
Y'all. Did I say a word about relative feelings about AA as between low-SES whites and high-SES whites? No. I did not. I merely offered a set of reasons as to why high-SES whites might have a problem with AA. You haven't refuted those, merely repeated your intuition that low-SES whites are more likely to have a problem with AA than are high-SES whites. So, work harder at reading next time!

For high-SES whites (among others), being against AA is not about impact--it's about narratives and psychology.

As for waitlisted, you're making an unfounded assumption in your third to last sentence. Or at least one you haven't even remotely supported. But more to the point, it's not one that refutes anything I've said.

mmm...

wait, but in that case, AA must be some sort of communal punishment for the sins of a few who have such narratives (because, really, how many people are truly elite).

but I thought you liberals were against communal punishment.  it's ok against whites, i guess, since we want to even the playing field at top by making it unfair in the middle and at the bottom?  gotcha.

What the @#!* you talking about? Communal punishment for what sins? Whose narratives? Elite what? I repeat, what the @#!* you talking about?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 12, 2008, 10:01:19 PM
dashrashi, I agree with your general point of view, but I'd like to get your opinion on an issue that I don't think you've addressed.  Do you think that stereotyping white people might lead to a higher level of cohesion within whites as a racial group?  Even if the stereotypes themselves are not negative, if they reinforce the idea among "whites" that "whites" are a distinct group, then that might have serious negative long-term effects on minority groups.  Do you think this assessment is off and that it shouldn't be a particular concern?  I recognize that you've already pointed out that white stereotypes are less problematic, but I was just wondering what you thought about this particular question.

Hmm. I don't think it's a serious problem. You've got the warring forces of A) white people often forgetting/not thinking of themselves at times as having a "race" in current parlance, and B) people like Bearly screaming that white people cannot be cohered. And I don't think it's very different from the way we mush other "race" groups together. Leaving aside the great big "Hispanic" issue, it's only white privilege and vantage (imo) that keeps us from seeing "black" as just as internally diverse as "white." Intellectually, we know about the internal diversity, but for the purposes of discussing "race," we lump all "black" together. If there's no inherent problem with that, I'm not sure I see the inherent problem with doing the same for "white" for the same purposes, since it's my contention that that's the functional truth anyway, due to the often-visual nature of prejudice in our society.

If you're getting at the idea that, by insisting that "whiteness" is a thing, we will accidentally create more people who are into being "white" and thereby create more white supremacists...? Eh. I'm not convinced. I don't think that that's how the links would work out in practice, for a number of reasons relating to the strong insistence within the white community of internal diversity (see B above), and the specific politics of white supremacy, among other things.

Good points about how the links would work out in practice, though I'd like to suggest that since change supposedly occurs at the margins, there might be some effect on people who hear that "whiteness" is a thing but do not hear assertions of internal diversity.  I guess what you're saying is that you think such effects would be minimal, and I don't see a good reason to argue that at this time.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 12, 2008, 10:04:18 PM
Y'all. Did I say a word about relative feelings about AA as between low-SES whites and high-SES whites? No. I did not. I merely offered a set of reasons as to why high-SES whites might have a problem with AA. You haven't refuted those, merely repeated your intuition that low-SES whites are more likely to have a problem with AA than are high-SES whites. So, work harder at reading next time!

For high-SES whites (among others), being against AA is not about impact--it's about narratives and psychology.

As for waitlisted, you're making an unfounded assumption in your third to last sentence. Or at least one you haven't even remotely supported. But more to the point, it's not one that refutes anything I've said.

mmm...

wait, but in that case, AA must be some sort of communal punishment for the sins of a few who have such narratives (because, really, how many people are truly elite).

but I thought you liberals were against communal punishment.  it's ok against whites, i guess, since we want to even the playing field at top by making it unfair in the middle and at the bottom?  gotcha.

The problem here is that you assume that AA has an overall negative effect on "whites".  Perhaps you should explain why you believe this.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 12, 2008, 10:14:21 PM
The problem here is that you assume that AA has an overall negative effect on "whites".  Perhaps you should explain why you believe this.

I never made that statement.  I was simply responding to the commentary above.

In fact, AA has the most negative affect on those busting their balls to make it up to the next rung who don't have anything but themselves to depend on.  Today, that would be Asians.  But I digress.

So you mean to say that a "communal punishment" should not interpreted as a negative effect?  Interesting position.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 12, 2008, 10:27:36 PM
The problem here is that you assume that AA has an overall negative effect on "whites".  Perhaps you should explain why you believe this.

I never made that statement.  I was simply responding to the commentary above.

In fact, AA has the most negative affect on those busting their balls to make it up to the next rung who don't have anything but themselves to depend on.  Today, that would be Asians.  But I digress.

So you mean to say that a "communal punishment" should not interpreted as a negative effect?  Interesting position.

Communal punishment on everybody else... not just whites... and I'm sure it does have an overall negative effect on whites, as would any quota system to exclude any group, um, duh.  there are 100 seats you get to compete for.  Institute new system, there are 90 seats.  Guess what, everybody who can't compete for those last ten seats is negatively affected.

I see.  So you say that there's harm to everyone, but by your own argument the people who are getting those ten seats benefit, are they not?

But more to the point, you completely ignore the possibility that there might also be benefits from system for "whites" as well.  Or are you suggesting that there are none?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 12, 2008, 10:33:06 PM
Y'all. Did I say a word about relative feelings about AA as between low-SES whites and high-SES whites? No. I did not. I merely offered a set of reasons as to why high-SES whites might have a problem with AA. You haven't refuted those, merely repeated your intuition that low-SES whites are more likely to have a problem with AA than are high-SES whites. So, work harder at reading next time!

For high-SES whites (among others), being against AA is not about impact--it's about narratives and psychology.

As for waitlisted, you're making an unfounded assumption in your third to last sentence. Or at least one you haven't even remotely supported. But more to the point, it's not one that refutes anything I've said.

mmm...

wait, but in that case, AA must be some sort of communal punishment for the sins of a few who have such narratives (because, really, how many people are truly elite).

but I thought you liberals were against communal punishment.  it's ok against whites, i guess, since we want to even the playing field at top by making it unfair in the middle and at the bottom?  gotcha.

What the @#!* you talking about? Communal punishment for what sins? Whose narratives? Elite what? I repeat, what the @#!* you talking about?

you wouldn't understand.  it's a bitter comment from a gun-clinging, religious, anti-immigrant, anti-trade citizen frustrated with society.

 ;)

you act is if there's this huge amorphous blob of vast numbers white people who have to meld narratives for why they got where they are.  maybe between your UG and HLS this is true (I suspect it isn't, it's just the ones you surround yourself with, and the rest who get to flash their bling), but the vast majority of people of any stripes aren't born with a silver spoon.  this is a tiny percentage of people, and to justify an unfair advantage based on it is disingenuous.




You're basically attempting a version of Bearly's argument, only much less nuanced and much more poorly phrased.

Quit wasting our time.  You weren't missed on this board.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 12, 2008, 10:46:01 PM
The problem here is that you assume that AA has an overall negative effect on "whites".  Perhaps you should explain why you believe this.

I never made that statement.  I was simply responding to the commentary above.

In fact, AA has the most negative affect on those busting their balls to make it up to the next rung who don't have anything but themselves to depend on.  Today, that would be Asians.  But I digress.

So you mean to say that a "communal punishment" should not interpreted as a negative effect?  Interesting position.

Communal punishment on everybody else... not just whites... and I'm sure it does have an overall negative effect on whites, as would any quota system to exclude any group, um, duh.  there are 100 seats you get to compete for.  Institute new system, there are 90 seats.  Guess what, everybody who can't compete for those last ten seats is negatively affected.

I see.  So you say that there's harm to everyone, but by your own argument the people who are getting those ten seats benefit, are they not?

But more to the point, you completely ignore the possibility that there might also be benefits from system for "whites" as well.  Or are you suggesting that there are none?

of course there are benefits.  most likely to accrue to the wealthier types who have a higher chance of getting in to begin with.  after they get in.  by the very definition of AA.

So you acknowledge then that the overall effect on "whites" might be positive?  In that case, I'm not sure how it would qualify as "communal punishment".  Care to explain further?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 12, 2008, 11:08:56 PM
it benefits the elites.

it benefits the people who get in because of it.

it punishes everybody else.  you know, the people trying to work hard and get somewhere in life.  bitter, gun-toting, church-going folks.

So when you say communal punishment, what you really mean is that it harms the people that it harms?  You're not really saying much there, are you now?  But really, you can't imagine any broader societal benefits at all?  Even hypothetical ones? 

Furthermore, I'd like to note that I discourage people from toting their guns to church.  It just seems inappropriate somehow.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 13, 2008, 07:11:50 AM
Y'all. Did I say a word about relative feelings about AA as between low-SES whites and high-SES whites? No. I did not. I merely offered a set of reasons as to why high-SES whites might have a problem with AA. You haven't refuted those, merely repeated your intuition that low-SES whites are more likely to have a problem with AA than are high-SES whites. So, work harder at reading next time!

For high-SES whites (among others), being against AA is not about impact--it's about narratives and psychology.

As for waitlisted, you're making an unfounded assumption in your third to last sentence. Or at least one you haven't even remotely supported. But more to the point, it's not one that refutes anything I've said.

mmm...

wait, but in that case, AA must be some sort of communal punishment for the sins of a few who have such narratives (because, really, how many people are truly elite).

but I thought you liberals were against communal punishment.  it's ok against whites, i guess, since we want to even the playing field at top by making it unfair in the middle and at the bottom?  gotcha.

What the @#!* you talking about? Communal punishment for what sins? Whose narratives? Elite what? I repeat, what the @#!* you talking about?

you wouldn't understand.  it's a bitter comment from a gun-clinging, religious, anti-immigrant, anti-trade citizen frustrated with society.

 ;)

you act is if there's this huge amorphous blob of vast numbers white people who have to meld narratives for why they got where they are.  maybe between your UG and HLS this is true (I suspect it isn't, it's just the ones you surround yourself with, and the rest who get to flash their bling), but the vast majority of people of any stripes aren't born with a silver spoon.  this is a tiny percentage of people, and to justify an unfair advantage based on it is disingenuous.



I still have no idea what you're on about, but I will reiterate: my narratives argument was an attempt to explain why, though they are purportedly not the ones directly affected by AA, high-SES whites might still oppose it. I'm not talking about whites in general, and you apparently also have a stick up your ass about where I've gone to school, which is random and makes you look weird and toolish.

If you're trying to say that only high-SES whites use narratives...I mean, you're factually wrong, but more than that, it's not a relevant rejoinder to anything I argued.

You really are very desperately not making any sense.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 13, 2008, 07:29:11 AM
Looks like this started up again, but I don't have time to fully indulge. Just a few comments:

1) Dash, I conceded long ago, and will continue to concede that as a macro group, whites do have more power than blacks in America. But...

2) The problem with the power argument, which you seem to address by saying things like "BEARLY, JESUS H" and "Bearly is screaming", etc. - rather by going for the substance, is that it assumes that "white people have power", when indeed, a large minority of white people do NOT have power. Why should it be ok to generalize and stereotype against them? Even if we do assume that whites as a macro group have access to more things we define as "power", why should the weakest members of society suffer for assumptions based on stereotypes about the most powerful? I hope you do address this point.

3) This is the most important part of this whole debate for me:

By maintaining a principle of "white privilege" and assumed "white power", authorities create significant racial tension between poor people - and as a byproduct perpetuate racism.

When you are a broke white immigrant who lost his job because the government-supported minority business development organization in your area has taken away your ability to compete fairly, you really have a vested interest in racist thinking. When you are a person working for an urban poverty panel, and you have been raised on assumptions of "white privilege", you will be less likely to spend limited resources on poor whites (and asians for that matter) than poor blacks, because the greater social paradigm assumes that "whites have power" - even when they don't.

I think we can be a little bit more sophisticated than that. I think we can say "Look, being black in America is in and of itself not a good experience, but the white guy that got raised in a trailer park and had his leg blown off in Iraq has had the chips stacked against him all his life just as badly as a URM in America", and apportion social resources in a way that benefits those individuals that need help rather than making broad-based assumptions using nothing more than the color of an individual's skin.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 13, 2008, 07:34:57 AM
Does the term "white privilege" necessarily imply that all "whites" are "privileged?"  It seems like you're trying to divide people into "privileged" and "nonprivileged" categories, which I feel is counterproductive.  Everyone has advantages and disadvantages, even the least advantaged members of a society.  "Whites" who would be considered disadvantaged by most measures still have the advantage of being "white", and this is not an insignificant advantage.

Maybe I just read the term differently from others.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 13, 2008, 07:44:36 AM
Does the term "white privilege" necessarily imply that all "whites" are "privileged?"  It seems like you're trying to divide people into "privileged" and "nonprivileged" categories, which I feel is counterproductive.  Everyone has advantages and disadvantages, even the least advantaged members of a society.  "Whites" who would be considered disadvantaged by most measures still have the advantage of being "white", and this is not an insignificant advantage.

Maybe I just read the term differently from others.

Dude, he disputes the bolded. I know, it's frustrating.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 13, 2008, 07:49:10 AM
"Whites" who would be considered disadvantaged by most measures still have the advantage of being "white", and this is not an insignificant advantage.
This is repeating what I said many pages ago, but I may as well repeat it becuause you are new to the debate:

1) There is a significant disadvantage to being poor and white in the hood.
2) There is a significant disadvantage to being a poor person in the only racial group without a significant advocacy network.
3) There is a significant disadvantage to being a poor person in the only racial group without access to a minority business development network.
4) There is a significant disadvantage to being a poor person in a racial group without access to school and employment AA programs. (This applies to Whites and Asians)
5) There is a significant disadvantage to being a disadvantaged person in the only racial group that is assumed to be advantaged.

For the poorest white people, the racial "advantages", are mitigated completely by the significant institutional racial "DIS-advantages".
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 13, 2008, 07:53:44 AM
"Whites" who would be considered disadvantaged by most measures still have the advantage of being "white", and this is not an insignificant advantage.
This is repeating what I said many pages ago, but I may as well repeat it becuause you are new to the debate:

1) There is a significant disadvantage to being poor and white in the hood.
2) There is a significant disadvantage to being a poor person in the only racial group without a significant advocacy network.
3) There is a significant disadvantage to being a poor person in the only racial group without access to a minority business development network.
4) There is a significant disadvantage to being a poor person in a racial group without access to school and employment AA programs. (This applies to Whites and Asians)
5) There is a significant disadvantage to being a disadvantaged person in the only racial group that is assumed to be advantaged.

For the poorest white people, the racial "advantages", are mitigated completely by the significant institutional racial "DIS-advantages".


So you're suggesting that the poorest "white" people are worse off than the poorest "black" people?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 13, 2008, 07:59:10 AM
"Whites" who would be considered disadvantaged by most measures still have the advantage of being "white", and this is not an insignificant advantage.
This is repeating what I said many pages ago, but I may as well repeat it becuause you are new to the debate:

1) There is a significant disadvantage to being poor and white in the hood.
2) There is a significant disadvantage to being a poor person in the only racial group without a significant advocacy network.
3) There is a significant disadvantage to being a poor person in the only racial group without access to a minority business development network.
4) There is a significant disadvantage to being a poor person in a racial group without access to school and employment AA programs. (This applies to Whites and Asians)
5) There is a significant disadvantage to being a disadvantaged person in the only racial group that is assumed to be advantaged.

For the poorest white people, the racial "advantages", are mitigated completely by the significant institutional racial "DIS-advantages".


So you're suggesting that the poorest "white" people are worse off than the poorest "black" people?
When it comes to being able to fit into greater society at large, NO. And this is where I agree with advocates of white privilege 100%.

But...

When it comes to being able to escape poverty, YES.

When the difference between going to college and being forced to be a fry cook for the rest of your life is access to AA and  minority scholarships, yes, the poorest white people have it worse.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 13, 2008, 08:00:34 AM
I have to go for today, but I'll be back to address constructive arguments and the many flames that are to come tomorrow. Have a good day, all!
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 13, 2008, 08:22:17 AM
"Whites" who would be considered disadvantaged by most measures still have the advantage of being "white", and this is not an insignificant advantage.
This is repeating what I said many pages ago, but I may as well repeat it becuause you are new to the debate:

1) There is a significant disadvantage to being poor and white in the hood.
2) There is a significant disadvantage to being a poor person in the only racial group without a significant advocacy network.
3) There is a significant disadvantage to being a poor person in the only racial group without access to a minority business development network.
4) There is a significant disadvantage to being a poor person in a racial group without access to school and employment AA programs. (This applies to Whites and Asians)
5) There is a significant disadvantage to being a disadvantaged person in the only racial group that is assumed to be advantaged.

For the poorest white people, the racial "advantages", are mitigated completely by the significant institutional racial "DIS-advantages".


So you're suggesting that the poorest "white" people are worse off than the poorest "black" people?
When it comes to being able to fit into greater society at large, NO. And this is where I agree with advocates of white privilege 100%.

But...

When it comes to being able to escape poverty, YES.

When the difference between going to college and being forced to be a fry cook for the rest of your life is access to AA and  minority scholarships, yes, the poorest white people have it worse.

Well then we disagree on the degree to which being "white" is an advantage.  But you still seem to be conceding that there is some advantage in it.  All you're really saying is that there are too many programs designed to help those who are not "white", or perhaps more accurately there are not enough programs designed to help poor "whites".  But in the complete absence of all such programs you would agree that being poor and "white" is better than being poor and not "white", right?

I don't think you disagree about the existence of particular factors, just on their particular weights.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 13, 2008, 09:29:57 AM
I don't think you disagree about the existence of particular factors, just on their particular weights.

The question is whether those weights even come close to justifying discriminatory race-based admissions criteria. 

In this thread, we have an argument that because some people opposed to AA can use it to their advantage psychologically , is the reason that many, many are opposed to it.  Horseshit. 

Dashrashi: Your education explains where some of your views are coming from.  You don't live in the real world, otherwise you wouldn't be using a tiny sliver of the population to explain discriminatory policies.  Coming out of schools with significant legacy admit proportions helps explain the situation. So you propose policies that keep the legacy admits in, while holding the meritorious who are clamoring at the door out to achieve some sort of social utopia.  It doesn't get more elitist than that.

And to add to the results, obviously most who get in not on the merits won't actually go too far (maybe a med school bureaucracy), so you keep the status quo at the top.  Brilliant! 

I guess I shouldn't care about any of this, after all I already got where I needed to be.  Maybe I should sign up to your plan now?  After all, it's only going to help me.  Nah.  I need the narrative and the psychology.

Maybe I can have a kid who'll sign on to your logic.  A bona-fide privileged high-SES self-loathing elitist do-gooder HLS-grad like Elliot Spitzer.

People who accuse others of not living in the real world amuse me.  After all, "living in the real world" is often synonymous with "agreeing with me."

No one lives in the real world.  Everybody just sees their own slice of reality. 

And for the record, dashrashi only suggested it as a possible reason why some people opposed it.  She didn't claim that it was the only reason why people opposed it, or that it was the primary motivation among those who do oppose it. 
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 13, 2008, 09:49:56 AM
I don't think you disagree about the existence of particular factors, just on their particular weights.

The question is whether those weights even come close to justifying discriminatory race-based admissions criteria. 

In this thread, we have an argument that because some people opposed to AA can use it to their advantage psychologically , is the reason that many, many are opposed to it.  Horseshit. 

Dashrashi: Your education explains where some of your views are coming from.  You don't live in the real world, otherwise you wouldn't be using a tiny sliver of the population to explain discriminatory policies.  Coming out of schools with significant legacy admit proportions helps explain the situation. So you propose policies that keep the legacy admits in, while holding the meritorious who are clamoring at the door out to achieve some sort of social utopia.  It doesn't get more elitist than that.

And to add to the results, obviously most who get in not on the merits won't actually go too far (maybe a med school bureaucracy), so you keep the status quo at the top.  Brilliant! 

I guess I shouldn't care about any of this, after all I already got where I needed to be.  Maybe I should sign up to your plan now?  After all, it's only going to help me.  Nah.  I need the narrative and the psychology.

Maybe I can have a kid who'll sign on to your logic.  A bona-fide privileged high-SES self-loathing elitist do-gooder HLS-grad like Elliot Spitzer.

People who accuse others of not living in the real world amuse me.  After all, "living in the real world" is often synonymous with "agreeing with me."

No one lives in the real world.  Everybody just sees their own slice of reality. 

And for the record, dashrashi only suggested it as a possible reason why some people opposed it.  She didn't claim that it was the only reason why people opposed it, or that it was the primary motivation among those who do oppose it. 

Or, alternatively, everyone lives in the real world, because, you know, Narnia's not actually real, so this is the one world we've got?

As for the bolded, emeffing bingo. I don't know how many times I have to say it. All I was doing with the narrative argument was attempting to provide one possible answer to the thread title's question. I did not say whether the majority of people feel this way, whether the majority of anti-AA people feel this way, whether the majority of high-SES anti-AA people feel this way, etc etc et f-in' cetera.

I seriously have no f-ing idea what waitlisted is talking about. Frankly, it tends toward the incoherent.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 13, 2008, 10:02:35 AM
I don't think you disagree about the existence of particular factors, just on their particular weights.

The question is whether those weights even come close to justifying discriminatory race-based admissions criteria. 

In this thread, we have an argument that because some people opposed to AA can use it to their advantage psychologically , is the reason that many, many are opposed to it.  Horseshit. 

Dashrashi: Your education explains where some of your views are coming from.  You don't live in the real world, otherwise you wouldn't be using a tiny sliver of the population to explain discriminatory policies.  Coming out of schools with significant legacy admit proportions helps explain the situation. So you propose policies that keep the legacy admits in, while holding the meritorious who are clamoring at the door out to achieve some sort of social utopia.  It doesn't get more elitist than that.

And to add to the results, obviously most who get in not on the merits won't actually go too far (maybe a med school bureaucracy), so you keep the status quo at the top.  Brilliant! 

I guess I shouldn't care about any of this, after all I already got where I needed to be.  Maybe I should sign up to your plan now?  After all, it's only going to help me.  Nah.  I need the narrative and the psychology.

Maybe I can have a kid who'll sign on to your logic.  A bona-fide privileged high-SES self-loathing elitist do-gooder HLS-grad like Elliot Spitzer.

People who accuse others of not living in the real world amuse me.  After all, "living in the real world" is often synonymous with "agreeing with me."

No one lives in the real world.  Everybody just sees their own slice of reality. 

And for the record, dashrashi only suggested it as a possible reason why some people opposed it.  She didn't claim that it was the only reason why people opposed it, or that it was the primary motivation among those who do oppose it. 

Or, alternatively, everyone lives in the real world, because, you know, Narnia's not actually real, so this is the one world we've got?

As for the bolded, emeffing bingo. I don't know how many times I have to say it. All I was doing with the narrative argument was attempting to provide one possible answer to the thread title's question. I did not say whether the majority of people feel this way, whether the majority of anti-AA people feel this way, whether the majority of high-SES anti-AA people feel this way, etc etc et f-in' cetera.

I seriously have no f-ing idea what waitlisted is talking about. Frankly, it tends toward the incoherent.


Maybe she's just trying to pick a fight?

And yes, either everyone lives in the real world or no one does.  Either way it's not a useful concept and the idea only exists for the purpose of undermining a person's arguments by making accusations about the person herself. 
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 13, 2008, 10:54:36 AM
There are plenty of reasons to be on either side of the AA debate.

But when elitist liberals suggest people of a certain status who opposes AA do out to inflate their sense of self-worth, well there are no words to describe the sheer arrogance of that position.  Maybe people respect what they have, and want others to have the same opportunities?  Nah...

Did you google a single thing I mentioned in my initial narratives post? I'll repeat them: system justification theory, the naturalistic fallacy, just-world hypothesis. The first one is key for our point here.

It's not my position that it's conscious self-inflation. Merely that people often have subconscious needs to structure their worlds in ways that reflect beliefs that the world is just, the system is fair, and that they are good and deserving people. Hell, research shows that everyone does that--not just the people on the top, who need to justify why/how they got where they are, but that people on the bottom will self-denigrate if you prime them correctly--in order to justify the way their world is ordered. They'd rather denigrate their own group (in some circumstances) than admit that there is something wrong with the larger system. This is a finding backed up by serious psychology research. Like I said, you can look it up.

I don't understand why you'd try to refute a research finding like that. It's not really controversial. You want to argue it, take it up with the neurologists and psychologists, not me.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 13, 2008, 10:59:18 AM
There are plenty of reasons to be on either side of the AA debate.

But when elitist liberals suggest people of a certain status who opposes AA do out to inflate their sense of self-worth, well there are no words to describe the sheer arrogance of that position.  Maybe people respect what they have, and want others to have the same opportunities?  Nah...

Is there a topic on which so-called elitist liberals could opine without your believing that they are being arrogant for doing so?  I suspect not.  Perhaps you simply want so-called elitist liberals to shut up on all topics? 
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 13, 2008, 11:03:09 AM
PSA: I'm a dash fangirl

Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 13, 2008, 11:53:19 AM
AA bothers me because it does not treat people equally, by definition.  Nothing fancy, just my honest opinion.

Flame away.

I think this is an understandable sentiment.  Do you have a similar objection to giving preference to children of alumni?  How about athletic scholarships for undergraduate institutions?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 13, 2008, 12:01:16 PM
AA bothers me because it does not treat people equally, by definition.  Nothing fancy, just my honest opinion.

Flame away.

I think this is an understandable sentiment.  Do you have a similar objection to giving preference to children of alumni?  How about athletic scholarships for undergraduate institutions?

No real opinion on the alumni thing, though it does seem a little silly.  As to athletic scholarships, my undergrad is well known and highly ranked almost exclusively because people want to go to the school with the awesome basketball team.  Hell, I like to see the school do well in basketball, so I guess I support it.  Those students should still have to perform though.  It definitely bothered me to hear stories about how the basketball players didn't have to show up at exams, or otherwise got out of their work because they wre special.

So it would bother you if admissions standards were lowered to get particular athletes admitted to your school?  Or does it only bother you if it's grossly disparate treatment, for example not having to show up at exams.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 13, 2008, 12:02:22 PM
AA bothers me because it does not treat people equally, by definition.  Nothing fancy, just my honest opinion.

Flame away.

I think this is an understandable sentiment.  Do you have a similar objection to giving preference to children of alumni?  How about athletic scholarships for undergraduate institutions?

No real opinion on the alumni thing, though it does seem a little silly.  As to athletic scholarships, my undergrad is well known and highly ranked almost exclusively because people want to go to the school with the awesome basketball team.  Hell, I like to see the school do well in basketball, so I guess I support it.  Those students should still have to perform though.  It definitely bothered me to hear stories about how the basketball players didn't have to show up at exams, or otherwise got out of their work because they wre special.

Have you asked yourself why you have a relatively well-formed opinion re "unequal treatment" when it comes to race, but not when it comes to children of alumni, or basketball players?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 13, 2008, 12:06:10 PM
  Or does it only bother you if it's grossly disparate treatment, for example not having to show up at exams.

I think that's the point I was trying to make.

So do you feel that treatment of racial minorities is more grossly disparate than treatment of student athletes?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 13, 2008, 12:07:50 PM
  Or does it only bother you if it's grossly disparate treatment, for example not having to show up at exams.

I think that's the point I was trying to make.

. . .

you do realize that's a completely different standard than you're holding for AA, a program that (at least according to some people) has a lot more merit/importance than a good basketball game?

See here (http://www.signonsandiego.com/sports/20061210-9999-1s10specials.html)
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 13, 2008, 12:12:20 PM
Have you asked yourself why you have a relatively well-formed opinion re "unequal treatment" when it comes to race, but not when it comes to children of alumni, or basketball players?

Not specifically until this moment, but I think that's easy to answer...

Because race (and gender I suppose) are things that confront us in our everyday lives, and also at a pretty deep/personal level.  Children of alumni, not so.  Basketball players?  Well, they're different in a significant (i.e., performance-based) way.  Treating people differently because they perform differently,.. c'est la vie.

So what you're saying is that athletes contribute something that others don't, and so they should be treated differently?  Why can't you say the same thing for people who are not "white" in terms of (probably) adding viewpoint diversity and thereby contributing to the intellectual community?  The intellectual community is, as Cady points out, more important to the ultimate goals of a university than is an athletic program.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 13, 2008, 12:14:29 PM
Have you asked yourself why you have a relatively well-formed opinion re "unequal treatment" when it comes to race, but not when it comes to children of alumni, or basketball players?

Not specifically until this moment, but I think that's easy to answer...

Because race (and gender I suppose) are things that confront us in our everyday lives, and also at a pretty deep/personal level.  Children of alumni, not so.  Basketball players?  Well, they're different in a significant (i.e., performance-based) way.  Treating people differently because they perform differently,.. c'est la vie.

So take it back to legacy admits for a second. They don't perform differently--it's something they don't have control over, born with it, etc. Similar to race/ethnicity, n'est-ce pas? If you don't care about giving preference to legacy admits, why do you care about giving preference to URMs?

And then see what Cady said.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 13, 2008, 12:19:15 PM
  Or does it only bother you if it's grossly disparate treatment, for example not having to show up at exams.

I think that's the point I was trying to make.

. . .

you do realize that's a completely different standard than you're holding for AA, a program that (at least according to some people) has a lot more merit/importance than a good basketball game?

See here (http://www.signonsandiego.com/sports/20061210-9999-1s10specials.html)

Oh I certainly think the advancement of minorities in our society is important, but I think my original statement makes clear that I believe that particalar goal is outweighed by the need to treat people equally (I might also say, "with respect").  In short: our society needs to grow up a bit.  And a I don't think social control mechanisms help that in the long term - since, as this very threat assumes, such devices DO create tension.

You don't address the point.

A lot of schools have lower admissions standards for athletes. You're okay with this because you want to see the school do well in basketball?

I'm also a bit shocked by your contention here that AA is tantamount to not treating people with respect.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 13, 2008, 12:27:49 PM
That exchange left me feeling rather unsatisfied.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 13, 2008, 01:16:36 PM
Looks like this started up again, but I don't have time to fully indulge. Just a few comments:

1) Dash, I conceded long ago, and will continue to concede that as a macro group, whites do have more power than blacks in America. But...

2) The problem with the power argument, which you seem to address by saying things like "BEARLY, JESUS H" and "Bearly is screaming", etc. - rather by going for the substance, is that it assumes that "white people have power", when indeed, a large minority of white people do NOT have power. Why should it be ok to generalize and stereotype against them? Even if we do assume that whites as a macro group have access to more things we define as "power", why should the weakest members of society suffer for assumptions based on stereotypes about the most powerful? I hope you do address this point.

3) This is the most important part of this whole debate for me:

By maintaining a principle of "white privilege" and assumed "white power", authorities create significant racial tension between poor people - and as a byproduct perpetuate racism.

When you are a broke white immigrant who lost his job because the government-supported minority business development organization in your area has taken away your ability to compete fairly, you really have a vested interest in racist thinking. When you are a person working for an urban poverty panel, and you have been raised on assumptions of "white privilege", you will be less likely to spend limited resources on poor whites (and asians for that matter) than poor blacks, because the greater social paradigm assumes that "whites have power" - even when they don't.

I think we can be a little bit more sophisticated than that. I think we can say "Look, being black in America is in and of itself not a good experience, but the white guy that got raised in a trailer park and had his leg blown off in Iraq has had the chips stacked against him all his life just as badly as a URM in America", and apportion social resources in a way that benefits those individuals that need help rather than making broad-based assumptions using nothing more than the color of an individual's skin.


::smh::


Dude, we've already pointed out time and time again why what you're describing is not akin to "white privilege".

Do not conflate dash's stereotype argument with the "white privilege" discussion.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 13, 2008, 01:20:10 PM
There are plenty of reasons to be on either side of the AA debate.

But when elitist liberals suggest people of a certain status who opposes AA do out to inflate their sense of self-worth, well there are no words to describe the sheer arrogance of that position.  Maybe people respect what they have, and want others to have the same opportunities?  Nah...


You truly are a walking ad hominem.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 13, 2008, 01:22:56 PM
Have you asked yourself why you have a relatively well-formed opinion re "unequal treatment" when it comes to race, but not when it comes to children of alumni, or basketball players?

Not specifically until this moment, but I think that's easy to answer...

Because race (and gender I suppose) are things that confront us in our everyday lives, and also at a pretty deep/personal level.  Children of alumni, not so.  Basketball players?  Well, they're different in a significant (i.e., performance-based) way.  Treating people differently because they perform differently,.. c'est la vie.


We're talking about a game with arbitrarily attached significance that serves no useful productive purpose.  You realize that, right?
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 13, 2008, 01:47:07 PM
Looks like this started up again, but I don't have time to fully indulge. Just a few comments:

1) Dash, I conceded long ago, and will continue to concede that as a macro group, whites do have more power than blacks in America. But...

2) The problem with the power argument, which you seem to address by saying things like "BEARLY, JESUS H" and "Bearly is screaming", etc. - rather by going for the substance, is that it assumes that "white people have power", when indeed, a large minority of white people do NOT have power. Why should it be ok to generalize and stereotype against them? Even if we do assume that whites as a macro group have access to more things we define as "power", why should the weakest members of society suffer for assumptions based on stereotypes about the most powerful? I hope you do address this point.

3) This is the most important part of this whole debate for me:

By maintaining a principle of "white privilege" and assumed "white power", authorities create significant racial tension between poor people - and as a byproduct perpetuate racism.

When you are a broke white immigrant who lost his job because the government-supported minority business development organization in your area has taken away your ability to compete fairly, you really have a vested interest in racist thinking. When you are a person working for an urban poverty panel, and you have been raised on assumptions of "white privilege", you will be less likely to spend limited resources on poor whites (and asians for that matter) than poor blacks, because the greater social paradigm assumes that "whites have power" - even when they don't.

I think we can be a little bit more sophisticated than that. I think we can say "Look, being black in America is in and of itself not a good experience, but the white guy that got raised in a trailer park and had his leg blown off in Iraq has had the chips stacked against him all his life just as badly as a URM in America", and apportion social resources in a way that benefits those individuals that need help rather than making broad-based assumptions using nothing more than the color of an individual's skin.


::smh::


Dude, we've already pointed out time and time again why what you're describing is not akin to "white privilege".

Do not conflate dash's stereotype argument with the "white privilege" discussion.

1) What's an ::smh::?

2) Again, some of you guys, and the racial academic community at large misdefine the word "privilege". In the context you are defining it, which is by and large strictly academic, I don't have major problems with it. But in the context that the words "white privilege" are used to actually shape public policy, they are not only highly inflammatory, but also infringe on rights to equal treatment under the law for poor white people -

Merriam Webster: a right, license, or exemption from duty or liability granted as a special benefit, advantage, or favor

The fact is that in the US - it is URMs, NOT whites who are extended special benefits, advantages and favors by political and civil authorities.

----

Sure, one can define pink as blue and say that the sky is actually pink - but that wouldn't make that person a) objectively correct, and b) wouldn't make policy that mandates stealth aircraft to be painted pink any more sensical.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 13, 2008, 02:08:07 PM
Ultimately, I think Bearly's objection to AA (among other programs designed to help minorities) is that it/they work/s too well, and so poor whites get comparatively screwed. (He apparently persists in ignoring the Armenian scholarship I found in under five minutes on Google, which at least partially refutes his point that poor white immigrants don't have the same kinds of programs available to them. Of course they do. You just have to be more specific than "poor white." I also found a Romanian scholarship and a Greek scholarship. See http://www.wcl.american.edu/outsidescholarships/heritage.cfm (http://www.wcl.american.edu/outsidescholarships/heritage.cfm) for plenty more, including scholarships for those with Czechoslovak, Iranian, Italian, Swiss, Polish, or even, yes, Serbian heritage, and of course the Soros Fellowship for New Americans.)
To paraphrase: if you put two people in the same crap situation, the white one may not have to deal with being harassed by the po on a daily basis, but he also can't get into law school easier etc, and so that means he's just as bad off, if not worse so, than his non-white compadre. In exchange for the daily indignities and abuses the non-white guy suffers because of his skin color, it's all made up for by programs designed to help people of his ethnicity, so actually he's better off than the white guy next to him.

I think that perhaps Bearly should go around asking the people AA is designed to help whether they think it works at all, let alone too well.

Merriam Webster: a right, license, or exemption from duty or liability granted as a special benefit, advantage, or favor

The fact is that in the US - it is URMs, NOT whites who are extended special benefits, advantages and favors by political and civil authorities.

WHAT?!?! :D :D :D

I grew up in a pretty economically depressed area, without a lot of opportunity for anyone, even the folks who had money, to advance much further than anyone else without leaving and staying gone. That means everyone was on pretty even footing. Would I trade places with any of the Asian/Pacific Islander, Native, Hispanic or African-American families in that area? Not "no" but "@#!* no!" Those groups have it so much worse than I do just on the basis of their heritage, that I would never consider trading my whiteness in. That's white privilege.

Dollars to doughnuts our man will respond by telling you that he would've traded ethnicities because of that one time he got beat up because he was white. He will also tell you that you are exceptional, duh, don't you know most poor whites would trade because their lives suck anyway and this way they can get government contracts? He will not have anything to back this up.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 13, 2008, 02:10:10 PM
Looks like this started up again, but I don't have time to fully indulge. Just a few comments:

1) Dash, I conceded long ago, and will continue to concede that as a macro group, whites do have more power than blacks in America. But...

2) The problem with the power argument, which you seem to address by saying things like "BEARLY, JESUS H" and "Bearly is screaming", etc. - rather by going for the substance, is that it assumes that "white people have power", when indeed, a large minority of white people do NOT have power. Why should it be ok to generalize and stereotype against them? Even if we do assume that whites as a macro group have access to more things we define as "power", why should the weakest members of society suffer for assumptions based on stereotypes about the most powerful? I hope you do address this point.

3) This is the most important part of this whole debate for me:

By maintaining a principle of "white privilege" and assumed "white power", authorities create significant racial tension between poor people - and as a byproduct perpetuate racism.

When you are a broke white immigrant who lost his job because the government-supported minority business development organization in your area has taken away your ability to compete fairly, you really have a vested interest in racist thinking. When you are a person working for an urban poverty panel, and you have been raised on assumptions of "white privilege", you will be less likely to spend limited resources on poor whites (and asians for that matter) than poor blacks, because the greater social paradigm assumes that "whites have power" - even when they don't.

I think we can be a little bit more sophisticated than that. I think we can say "Look, being black in America is in and of itself not a good experience, but the white guy that got raised in a trailer park and had his leg blown off in Iraq has had the chips stacked against him all his life just as badly as a URM in America", and apportion social resources in a way that benefits those individuals that need help rather than making broad-based assumptions using nothing more than the color of an individual's skin.


::smh::


Dude, we've already pointed out time and time again why what you're describing is not akin to "white privilege".

Do not conflate dash's stereotype argument with the "white privilege" discussion.

1) What's an ::smh::?

2) Again, some of you guys, and the racial academic community at large misdefine the word "privilege". In the context you are defining it, which is by and large strictly academic, I don't have major problems with it. But in the context that the words "white privilege" are used to actually shape public policy, they are not only highly inflammatory, but also infringe on rights to equal treatment under the law for poor white people -

Merriam Webster: a right, license, or exemption from duty or liability granted as a special benefit, advantage, or favor

The fact is that in the US - it is URMs, NOT whites who are extended special benefits, advantages and favors by political and civil authorities.

----

Sure, one can define pink as blue and say that the sky is actually pink - but that wouldn't make that person a) objectively correct, and b) wouldn't make policy that mandates stealth aircraft to be painted pink any more sensical.


Now you're just being obstinate.  It's not some fancy schmancy academic term we're throwing out.  It's just a different sort of privilege than you're describing.  And yes, it is a privilege, no matter how insubstantial it might be at times.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 13, 2008, 02:10:59 PM
What would you find a more acceptable phrasing, BearlyLegal?  What if instead of saying "white privilege", we referred to it as "the benefits that an individual gains from the fact that he or she is part of the majority race", and acknowledge that a particular combination of government and private programs that benefited non-white groups could outweigh such benefits?  Would that be more acceptable to you?

That was unnecessarily long-winded.  I apologize.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 13, 2008, 02:11:27 PM
Don't be silly, J. No one is ever obstinate on the internet.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Astro on April 13, 2008, 02:11:42 PM
dash:


I'm just going to defend Bearly here for a second.  He does not object to AA.  He's said that so many times, I've lost count.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 13, 2008, 02:15:07 PM
Ultimately, I think Bearly's objection to AA (among other programs designed to help minorities) is that it/they work/s too well, and so poor whites get comparatively screwed. (He apparently persists in ignoring the Armenian scholarship I found in under five minutes on Google, which at least partially refutes his point that poor white immigrants don't have the same kinds of programs available to them. Of course they do. You just have to be more specific than "poor white." I also found a Romanian scholarship and a Greek scholarship. See http://www.wcl.american.edu/outsidescholarships/heritage.cfm (http://www.wcl.american.edu/outsidescholarships/heritage.cfm) for plenty more, including scholarships for those with Czechoslovak, Iranian, Italian, Swiss, Polish, or even, yes, Serbian heritage, and of course the Soros Fellowship for New Americans.)
To paraphrase: if you put two people in the same crap situation, the white one may not have to deal with being harassed by the po on a daily basis, but he also can't get into law school easier etc, and so that means he's just as bad off, if not worse so, than his non-white compadre. In exchange for the daily indignities and abuses the non-white guy suffers because of his skin color, it's all made up for by programs designed to help people of his ethnicity, so actually he's better off than the white guy next to him.

I think that perhaps Bearly should go around asking the people AA is designed to help whether they think it works at all, let alone too well.

Merriam Webster: a right, license, or exemption from duty or liability granted as a special benefit, advantage, or favor

The fact is that in the US - it is URMs, NOT whites who are extended special benefits, advantages and favors by political and civil authorities.

WHAT?!?! :D :D :D

I grew up in a pretty economically depressed area, without a lot of opportunity for anyone, even the folks who had money, to advance much further than anyone else without leaving and staying gone. That means everyone was on pretty even footing. Would I trade places with any of the Asian/Pacific Islander, Native, Hispanic or African-American families in that area? Not "no" but "@#!* no!" Those groups have it so much worse than I do just on the basis of their heritage, that I would never consider trading my whiteness in. That's white privilege.

Dollars to doughnuts our man will respond by telling you that he would've traded ethnicities because of that one time he got beat up because he was white. He will also tell you that you are exceptional, duh, don't you know most poor whites would trade because their lives suck anyway and this way they can get government contracts? He will not have anything to back this up.

To be fair, perhaps the majority of poor whites would trade.  But that doesn't prove anything anyway.  Grass is always greener and whatnot.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 13, 2008, 02:26:56 PM
To be fair, perhaps the majority of poor whites would trade.  But that doesn't prove anything anyway.  Grass is always greener and whatnot.

I feel comfortable in saying that all of the white people I went to high school with--yes, I knew everyone--would say "no" if asked if they wanted to change their race. I'm confident, in fact, that the guys would make a couple "big male private part" jokes then quickly say that they wouldn't. Hardly representative of the whole country's poor white population, but still.

Maybe someone should ask Eminem sometime.

My point was that it doesn't matter even if the majority would trade.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 13, 2008, 02:33:29 PM
dash:


I'm just going to defend Bearly here for a second.  He does not object to AA.  He's said that so many times, I've lost count.


I think on some level, he resents that non-white minorities "have access" to "all these programs" whereas poor whites "don't." It's not exactly anti-AA, but it's not the polar opposite, either.

ETA: Honestly, the whole thing just sort of squicks me out because it's the height of gross to begrudge those whom are the worst off any meager benefits they or we can come up with to rectify the situation. Like, ew, don't be gross. Things SUCK for them. You think the few programs that currently exist and are being snipped at every day by anti-AA types change that in any overarchingly real or systematic way? Why would you bother having an issue about that, when there are so many other things to have an issue about? Why get all het up, right now, just here, about "equality"? Because you're being gross. So don't be gross.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 13, 2008, 02:38:39 PM
Perhaps he finds that the problem is not the proliferation programs intended to help poor non-white minorities, but rather the lack of programs intended to help poor whites.  Or more simply, more programs intended to help those of disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds regardless of race.  This does not necessarily entail a reduction of race-based affirmative action and might be a position around which we might all be able to agree.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 13, 2008, 04:39:34 PM
dash:


I'm just going to defend Bearly here for a second.  He does not object to AA.  He's said that so many times, I've lost count.

Thanks, J.
Dash, we disagree on much, but I ask that you do not misrepresent my position.

I support AA. I also support all kinds of minority business initiatives, minority scholarships, etc. Because I recognize that we live in a world where the total percentage of minorities who NEED institutional support systems to escape poverty and cyclical undereducation far surpasses the total percentage of whites and asians who need them. I understand that America's history of slavery, Jim Crow, etc. is the primary reason that we live in these inequitable times, and I hope that these programs will one day prove effective in narrowing the racial socio-economic divide.

Second, I do not begrudge minorities these programs. I went through some poverty, but I came out OK. Again, my opportunities in the US far surpass anything that would be available to me in my home country, and I feel blessed to even have had the opportunity to go to college instead of being mandatorily conscripted into some hellish third-world military as a teenager. I feel totally fine that this country offers even greater opportunities to people whose ancestors came here on slave ships, and were savagely punished for trying to educate their children.

My only contention, and I keep repeating this because I feel passionately about it - is that the social justice dialogue in this country often seems to focus almost completely on issues of race, at times purposefully denying the impact of class. Labeling poor white people "privileged" is one example of this kind of mischaracterization - that is not only a dishonest one, but stirs up significant racial resentment and hatered.

What riles me up isn't that African Americans get access to AA, scholarships, and other programs that exist to help them - it's that the media, the government, and popular academia don't even ackgnowlege the existence of class in this country, and how it impacts whites who are decidedly UNDERprivileged.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 13, 2008, 04:45:28 PM
Perhaps he finds that the problem is not the proliferation programs intended to help poor non-white minorities, but rather the lack of programs intended to help poor whites.  Or more simply, more programs intended to help those of disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds regardless of race.  This does not necessarily entail a reduction of race-based affirmative action and might be a position around which we might all be able to agree.
::Gives Cookie:: Thanks!

It's ok to provide all the race-based AA and other programs to help minorities in bad situations without necessarily ignoring the needs of poor whites at the same time. These positions are not at odds to each other.

I want AA to continue until the day that a little black kid growing up in the hood is as likely to think he might be a lawyer one day as a rich white kid growing up in connecticut. I just don't see a reason to take a dump on the poor white kid groing up in that very same hood for no reason.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 13, 2008, 05:00:33 PM
dash:


I'm just going to defend Bearly here for a second.  He does not object to AA.  He's said that so many times, I've lost count.

Thanks, J.
Dash, we disagree on much, but I ask that you do not misrepresent my position.

I support AA. I also support all kinds of minority business initiatives, minority scholarships, etc. Because I recognize that we live in a world where the total percentage of minorities who NEED institutional support systems to escape poverty and cyclical undereducation far surpasses the total percentage of whites and asians who need them. I understand that America's history of slavery, Jim Crow, etc. is the primary reason that we live in these inequitable times, and I hope that these programs will one day prove effective in narrowing the racial socio-economic divide.

Second, I do not begrudge minorities these programs. I went through some poverty, but I came out OK. Again, my opportunities in the US far surpass anything that would be available to me in my home country, and I feel blessed to even have had the opportunity to go to college instead of being mandatorily conscripted into some hellish third-world military as a teenager. I feel totally fine that this country offers even greater opportunities to people whose ancestors came here on slave ships, and were savagely punished for trying to educate their children.

My only contention, and I keep repeating this because I feel passionately about it - is that the social justice dialogue in this country often seems to focus almost completely on issues of race, at times purposefully denying the impact of class. Labeling poor white people "privileged" is one example of this kind of mischaracterization - that is not only a dishonest one, but stirs up significant racial resentment and hatered.

What riles me up isn't that African Americans get access to AA, scholarships, and other programs that exist to help them - it's that the media, the government, and popular academia don't even ackgnowlege the existence of class in this country, and how it impacts whites who are decidedly UNDERprivileged.

To say that there is such a thing as white privilege which exists on a micro level is not to call disadvantaged whites "privileged." The fact that you continue to push this as any argument that's been legitimately made in this thread (aside from by you, as a straw man), leads me to believe that, at this point, you are being purposefully obtuse about the meaning of the term "white privilege." Period.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 13, 2008, 05:06:21 PM
For f-ing serious. Geez.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 13, 2008, 05:09:24 PM
dash:


I'm just going to defend Bearly here for a second.  He does not object to AA.  He's said that so many times, I've lost count.

Thanks, J.
Dash, we disagree on much, but I ask that you do not misrepresent my position.

I support AA. I also support all kinds of minority business initiatives, minority scholarships, etc. Because I recognize that we live in a world where the total percentage of minorities who NEED institutional support systems to escape poverty and cyclical undereducation far surpasses the total percentage of whites and asians who need them. I understand that America's history of slavery, Jim Crow, etc. is the primary reason that we live in these inequitable times, and I hope that these programs will one day prove effective in narrowing the racial socio-economic divide.

Second, I do not begrudge minorities these programs. I went through some poverty, but I came out OK. Again, my opportunities in the US far surpass anything that would be available to me in my home country, and I feel blessed to even have had the opportunity to go to college instead of being mandatorily conscripted into some hellish third-world military as a teenager. I feel totally fine that this country offers even greater opportunities to people whose ancestors came here on slave ships, and were savagely punished for trying to educate their children.

My only contention, and I keep repeating this because I feel passionately about it - is that the social justice dialogue in this country often seems to focus almost completely on issues of race, at times purposefully denying the impact of class. Labeling poor white people "privileged" is one example of this kind of mischaracterization - that is not only a dishonest one, but stirs up significant racial resentment and hatered.

What riles me up isn't that African Americans get access to AA, scholarships, and other programs that exist to help them - it's that the media, the government, and popular academia don't even ackgnowlege the existence of class in this country, and how it impacts whites who are decidedly UNDERprivileged.

To say that there is such a thing as white privilege which exists on a micro level is not to call disadvantaged whites "privileged." The fact that you continue to push this as any argument that's been legitimately made in this thread (aside from by you, as a straw man), leads me to believe that, at this point, you are being purposefully obtuse about the meaning of the term "white privilege." Period.
To use the phrase "White Privilege" is offensive, dishonest and inflammatory. To say that "White Privilege" is in every way different from any other kind of privilege (definition above) is dishonest. To maintain that basic rules of english don't apply to this concept and this concept alone is bull.

When I say "Membership Privilege" - It means that members are privileged. When I say "Executive Privilege" - it means that presidents are privileged. When you say "White Privilege" - it means that white people are privileged. Well I have demonstrated that white people are not necessarily privileged - many are underprivileged. To continue using this specific phrase when you know that it doesn't describe the actual thing it's meant to describe leads me to believe that somewhere in your heart, you just don't give a poo about underprivileged white people. Period.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 13, 2008, 05:11:43 PM
JESUS f-ing CHRIST.

Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 13, 2008, 05:15:43 PM
JESUS f-ing CHRIST.



Credited.

As far as your ridiculous f-ing dictionary argument goes, sometimes, when you combine words into phrases, the meanings of the phrases don't exactly match up to their individual components' definitions any more. Crazy, I know.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 13, 2008, 05:19:30 PM
Are you all just arguing about terminology at this point?  That's how it seems to me.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 13, 2008, 05:20:41 PM
Also, seriously, I don't hear "Executive Privilege" and think...OH! THE PRESIDENT IS SO PRIVILEGED! HIS LIFE IS SO AWESOME! I think "oh, there are benefits and privileges that attach to the President, because that person is the President."
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: dashrashi on April 13, 2008, 05:21:27 PM
Are you all just arguing about terminology at this point?  That's how it seems to me.

IMO, to deny "white privilege" is to do harm to race relations in this country. Speech has power.

Also, seriously, I don't hear "Executive Privilege" and think...OH! THE PRESIDENT IS SO PRIVILEGED! HIS LIFE IS SO AWESOME! I think "oh, there are benefits and privileges that attach to the President, because that person is the President."

Bingo.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: Susan B. Anthony on April 13, 2008, 05:22:07 PM
Are you all just arguing about terminology at this point?  That's how it seems to me.

I think that dash and I (and I guess J and anyone else who has ever used the term "white privilege" without saying that it's such a bad term because not all white people poop rainbows) are trying to demonstrate that we don't hate white poor people.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: BearlyLegal on April 13, 2008, 05:26:07 PM
JESUS f-ing CHRIST.



Credited.

As far as your ridiculous f-ing dictionary argument goes, sometimes, when you combine words into phrases, the meanings of the phrases don't exactly match up to their individual components' definitions any more. Crazy, I know.
I'm not all that phased by the LSD menshiviks agreeing on things - even if those things are pure nonsense.

As far as your ridiculous f-ing "phrase" argument goes, the fact that you completely disregard the meanings of the words inside the phrase when they specifically are used by policy makers to justify making policies that deprive underprivileged people of oppotunities to raise themselves out of poverty makes me think that YOU are being intentionally obtuse.
Title: Re: Be honest WASPs: why does AA really bother you?
Post by: xdhbc on April 13, 2008, 05:27:17 PM
Are you all just arguing about terminology at this point?  That's how it seems to me.

IMO, to deny "white privilege" is to do harm to race relations in this country. Speech has power.

Also, seriously, I don't hear "Executive Privilege" and think...OH! THE PRESIDENT IS SO PRIVILEGED! HIS LIFE IS SO AWESOME! I think "oh, there are benefits and privileges that attach to the President, because that person is the President."