It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What can we do to address race-relations and solve racism?

page: 12
2
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by donwhite
Like Good Looks, B/H, Sensitivity - Empathy - You Have It Or You Don't

It may well be a genetic feature over which we have no control. I dunno.


Well, I've been told I'm pretty good-looking so there is that. But you seem to be saying that because I don't find that ad racist that I'm not sensitive or empathetic?

Thanks...




posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 05:41 PM
link   


posted by Benevolent Heretic

Well, I've been told I'm pretty good-looking so there is that. But you seem to be saying that because I don't find that ad racist that I'm not sensitive or empathetic?
Thanks


You know, B/H, as I get older, I find more and more women to be prettier and prettier. Maybe I was a young snob? Or I hope it is realizing there really is truth in “beauty is more than skin deep.”

I guess it is also an acknowledgment that we are not all alike, even in those socially desirable qualities of sensitively and empathy. Just as some people are taller and some heavier, so some seem to be more inquisitive of the effects the not so obvious has on other people. I conclude some people are and some are not.

If a person is carrying no weight, then adding a pound means little, but if a person is already carrying a full load, that same extra pound might break their back. So watch those extra pounds.



posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 05:52 PM
link   


posted by jsobecky
George Wallace was a DEMOCRAT, donwhite, so your attempt to paint the Grand Ole Party as singularly racist is incorrect. Plus, he had plenty of support from black voters.
[Edited by Don W]


You’re out of date and wrong on both points Mr J. Woodrow Wilson showed “Birth of a Naiton” in the White House and praised it! Would Woodrow Wilson be welcome in the Demoratic Party of 2006 or would he be more likely to find people of kindred spirit in the Grand Old Party?

JB, you seem to like your cocoon of denial and obfuscation, so why should I take you to school? At the end of class you’d likely be unconvinced. Just explain (to yourself, I know) what Nixon meant by the ‘Southern Strategy’ and what Ronnie Reagan meant by ‘Boll Weevils.’ Then get back to me if you want.



[edit on 8/17/2006 by donwhite]



posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by donwhite
If a person is carrying no weight, then adding a pound means little, but if a person is already carrying a full load, that same extra pound might break their back. So watch those extra pounds.


What the bloody hell are you talking about? Don't answer that. I likely won't understand it anyway.

I'll just go on, knowing that you're not going to explain why the ad is racist and assuming it's probably because you can't verbalize it... Probably because it's not racist - you're just super sensitive. If a black person is eating an Oreo, you think it's racist. Great. Carry on. Let's hope they don't have white people doing Saltines commercials or Mexicans advertizing tacos.



posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 06:03 PM
link   
Nothing Personal

I'm quite guilty of it myself (sorry ceci!), but let's please try to remember to avoid commenting on other members directly.

I know it's not easy because this is an issue which affects all of us personally in oh so many different ways, but it can become a major flamewar if we're not careful.


As it is, however, I think we're doing a great job of exploring many different aspects of a sensitive topic, and that is something to be proud of!



posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
That's what I'm saying. Be angry at the individuals who are responsible... If I were to take your stance, I'd say "Since violent, women-hating rappers are black and the rap industry is black and gangs are black, then I am angry at black people. Because I don't like violence, women-haters, gangs and rap."

You confuse me BH. First you agree with my viewpoint, then you tell me I have to be more discriminating. Which one is it?

BTW, here's another popular misconception. The 'rap industry' is not all black. I wish. No, it's owned and operated almost entirely by whites. They just use black front men. So, you have someone else to add to your list.




Tell me how I can refuse the privilege of being white. Specifically. What should I do?

Your guess is as good as mine. I don't claim to be an expert on this. I just wanted to point out that all whites appear to enjoy it. It's up to white people to figure that one out.



And it's up to those of us who SEE the wrong to stop it when we see it. Talk about it. Fight against it.

Unfortunately, when we blacks attempt to do just that, we're accused of "screaming about race," like Ceci. Our opinions are marginalized. See the problem? That's why it's up to the white people who see it and think its wrong to step up to the plate.

We've been saying its wrong the whole time. If anybody listened, we wouldn't be having this conversation now.



But whatever you do, get it clear in your head who you're fighting against. As long as you think your enemy is "white people" instead of the system, you're going down the wrong rabbit hole...

BH, I feel like you're trying to convince me to do something I've already done. I'm the one who said it was the System. I've already reached that conclusion.




Do you think I'm any less pissed? This crap infuriates me! And plenty of white people feel the same way.

Good.



posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by HarlemHottie
You confuse me BH. First you agree with my viewpoint, then you tell me I have to be more discriminating. Which one is it?


I may agree with some of what you think or say, but I know I've never said I agree entirely with your viewpoint. This subject isn't so black and white (pardon the pun) as that.




BTW, here's another popular misconception. The 'rap industry' is not all black. I wish. No, it's owned and operated almost entirely by whites.


Who writes the songs? Who speaks of women in this disparaging manner? Who performs the songs? Who carries the guns? Who shoots people for stepping on their 'turf'? Who sells the drugs? Not the white men behind the industry. I see you avoided answering another question.

It's interesting that you say you'll answer questions, but then you're very selective with which questions you answer. That tells me that your position isn't as strong as I thought it was. I'm not stupid, I can tell when my questions are being avoided...



So, you have someone else to add to your list.



What list? I said "IF" I were to say this about rappers. I do not say this nor do I think or feel this way about rappers or black people. I know better than that. It was a hypothetical question.



I just wanted to point out that all whites appear to enjoy it. It's up to white people to figure that one out.


Well, I don't think there's anything to figure out. I enjoy my life. Not because I'm white.
But because I have love in my life. I don't see anything I have to figure out. If I am privileged, it's because my mother loved me and taught me to love and I have cultivated a lifestyle of love. And yes, I enjoy it very much.



That's why it's up to the white people who see it and think its wrong to step up to the plate.


Good luck holding the white people responsible for solving racism. No wonder it's taking so long if it's all on us. We're not that affected by it.



BH, I feel like you're trying to convince me to do something I've already done. I'm the one who said it was the System. I've already reached that conclusion.



The difference is that you think The System is synonymous with White People. I don't.



posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by donwhite
You’re out of date and wrong on both points Mr J. Woodrow Wilson showed “Birth of a Naiton” in the White House and praised it! Would Woodrow Wilson be welcome in the Demoratic Party of 2006 or would he be more likely to find people of kindred spirit in the Grand Old Party?

Once again, you're dancing, donwhite. I was referring to your error about George Wallace and you take off on a tangent to avoid having to answer. You've been asked repeatedly what is racist about those ads, yet you cannot answer except for some pablum about sensitivity. You think that by going off-topic with some long-winded treatise about the price of rice in China that people will forget what the original question was.

But that's OK, donwhite. You are convinced, as you have stated, that all white people born after a certain date are racist, and that if a person is a Republican it's a given. How can I debate logic like that?


Who started up the KKK, donwhite? A republican? Guess again.


The Klan sought to control the political and social status of the freed slaves. Specifically, it attempted to curb black education, economic advancement, voting rights, and the right to bear arms. However, the Klan's focus was not limited to African Americans; Southern Republicans also became the target of vicious intimidation tactics.

en.wikipedia.org...


[edit on 17-8-2006 by jsobecky]



posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 09:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by HarlemHottie

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
That's what I'm saying. Be angry at the individuals who are responsible... If I were to take your stance, I'd say "Since violent, women-hating rappers are black and the rap industry is black and gangs are black, then I am angry at black people. Because I don't like violence, women-haters, gangs and rap."

You confuse me BH. First you agree with my viewpoint, then you tell me I have to be more discriminating. Which one is it?

BTW, here's another popular misconception. The 'rap industry' is not all black. I wish. No, it's owned and operated almost entirely by whites. They just use black front men. So, you have someone else to add to your list.


Only a portion of your reasoning IMO can be attributed to racism. Most of it is better attributed to plain jane greed.




Tell me how I can refuse the privilege of being white. Specifically. What should I do?

Your guess is as good as mine. I don't claim to be an expert on this. I just wanted to point out that all whites appear to enjoy it. It's up to white people to figure that one out.


The loft I rent happened to come with a garbage disposal. I feel empathy for those without garbage disposals and would happily install one for someone without; but I don't refrain from using the priviledge every day.




And it's up to those of us who SEE the wrong to stop it when we see it. Talk about it. Fight against it.

Unfortunately, when we blacks attempt to do just that, we're accused of "screaming about race," like Ceci. Our opinions are marginalized. See the problem? That's why it's up to the white people who see it and think its wrong to step up to the plate.

We've been saying its wrong the whole time. If anybody listened, we wouldn't be having this conversation now.


I think you mean if 'everybody' listened.




Do you think I'm any less pissed? This crap infuriates me! And plenty of white people feel the same way.

Good.


And is increasing every generation. It may not be quick enough, it may not be possible to achieve, but it is getting better.



posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 11:02 PM
link   

Originally quoted by WestPoint23
Regarding the OJ trail, personally I’m not thrilled when someone whom I consider to be guilty based on circumstance and evidence get acquitted. OJ should be in jail, his case should one of those highlighted to show that our legal system doesn't always work.


Well, personally, I'm not thrilled that Claus von Bülow got off, but he was tried by a jury of his peers and found not guilty. So was OJ. I'll say it again. OJ put on the best defense he knew how. He was tried by a jury of his peers and found not guilty.

There's nothing you can do about it. To try him again would be double jeopardy. Now, of course, if you count the civil trial against him, the Browns and the Goldbergs made a killing because public sympathy was on their side.

It's an example of the legal system working perfectly--when all conditions are used to its best potential. The prosecution had their chance to put on a good case. They did not. The Medical Examiner's office was held liable. The LAPD was held liable (in demonstrating that they mishandled evidence and harbored racist feelings against Blacks, which is true knowing how the authorities treat [and still do] people of color). And even the prosecution was held liable.

The problem, imho, is the fact that people can't get over the fact that OJ used the very legal system that in the past has had weighted juries and prosecution in the deep South. In those trials (that had blacks being prosecuted), the jury hardly needed evidence to convict. They just out and out did it. And Blacks went to jail. Or if a White suspect was put on trial for his crimes against Blacks during that time, that same "all-white" jury would let him off because of their prejudices against African-Americans.

Where's the justice in that?

In fact, Robert Blake was arrested on circumstancial evidence. In a trial, he was found not guilty by a jury of his peers. Where's your outrage at the system in his case? Is the legal system also wrong when trying his case as well?

What I see in the OJ case is a lot of misplaced anger due to prejudice. It has been for the last decade. I still stand by my earlier remarks. OJ represents a breach in the system because he did exactly what the "dominant culture" has proposed for many years when Blacks cried out against the legal system: the legal system is just and works perfectly for those who play ball with it.

Can you say that it did not work perfectly for OJ as well as Robert Blake?


Yet some people defend him even though IMO he was clearly guilty because he beat the system and all that other crap.


Why shouldn't they? The courts couldn't prosecute him, but the trial of public opinion has. And because of the trial of public opinion, OJ will always be considered guilty no matter what he says.

I think here again, people are upset that OJ wasn't put in the chair. And that is probably because of the time the case was prosecuted in. People in LA were still steaming over the Rodney King trial which brought down one of the most biased Sheriffs in LA county, Darryl Gates. And of course, the Riots showed that people were disatisfied with disparities that happened in the legal system as well as with the police. After all, in the first trial of the four policemen who beat up Rodney King, they were found not guilty by a jury of their peers when the video tape clearly showed that they were guilty. Not to mention that the first trial was held in Simi Valley, the place where retired cops in Southern California go to live. Now why do you think the jury in Simi Valley ruled the way they did?

OJ didn't have a video tape to prove his culpability. All he had was a bloody glove that did not fit. And even after that, people still think he's guilty.

A white suspect could have the klieg lights blaring and a camera showing his crimes. And there is still the perception of innocence. Watch the news about John Mark Karr go down in the next days. Why do you think people are questioning his confession?

People did not question those things about OJ. He was simply guilty.

See the difference?


BTW do you think he was guilty, Ceci?


As I mentioned to you before, I have mixed feelings about the case. I truly believe that OJ might have been culpable in the deaths of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman somehow. But, did he wield the knife? No.

And that is because of money. Money talks in L.A. When the rich want to do crime, they don't do it themselves. They pay for someone else to do it.

More on the OJ trial and its implications on race-relations later. There's a lot more ground to cover.





[edit on 18-8-2006 by ceci2006]



posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 11:49 PM
link   
BH, it seems like no matter what I say, you'll continue to put words in my mouth. Here's your original question, from pg 9, and my original answer, on pg 10. This is the last time I'll address it.


Originally posted by HarlemHottie

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I get this. I understand this. You're angry. But at whom? Do you discriminate or are all white people guilty and responsible?

I am choosy about where I place my guilt... So, no, I don't hold racial stuff against people in normal life. Why should I? They don't make the major decisions. It's their leaders... in everyday life, I only think about racism, or white privilege, when it inconveniences me.



Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I see you avoided answering another question.

It's interesting that you say you'll answer questions, but then you're very selective with which questions you answer. That tells me that your position isn't as strong as I thought it was. I'm not stupid, I can tell when my questions are being avoided...

Calm down. I took it as a rhetorical question. If you were curious as to why I didn't answer, you could have asked, without the attitude.

My answer, obviously, is that you would be a racist. That's what you were going for, right? Duh.



Well, I don't think there's anything to figure out.

So, you're saying you don't believe that white privilege exists?



Good luck holding the white people responsible for solving racism. No wonder it's taking so long if it's all on us. We're not that affected by it.

Did you totally ignore everything I said and skip right to the last sentence? No wonder it's taking so long, if the people who claim to be fighting racism make statements like this one.



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 12:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by nextguyinline
Only a portion of your reasoning IMO can be attributed to racism. Most of it is better attributed to plain jane greed.

I'm sorry, I didn't get this. Would you mind explaining what you meant here?



The loft I rent happened to come with a garbage disposal. I feel empathy for those without garbage disposals and would happily install one for someone without; but I don't refrain from using the priviledge every day.

Unlike garbage disposals, 'privilege' in America is a finite resource. If some people suck it all up, there's none left for the rest of us.



I think you mean if 'everybody' listened.

Maybe you're right. There are people, like donwhite, who listened.



And is increasing every generation. It may not be quick enough, it may not be possible to achieve, but it is getting better.


I know, and I agree. Someone else, I can't remember who, said this a few pages back. My point is, we've been here since the very beginning (as evidenced by the Slave Codes of 1705). How much longer do I need to wait?



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by HarlemHottie
So, you're saying you don't believe that white privilege exists?


No. I'm not saying that at all. White people have an advantage over people of color in certain situations. Pretty people have an advantage over ugly people. Rich have advantages over poor. Non-handicapped people have an advantage over handicapped people. Men have advantages over women. Blacks have advantages over whites. Christians have advantages over Jews. Young people have advantages over older people and old people have advantages over young. It all depends on the situation and context.



White privilege, or White Skin Privilege, is used as a term of analysis -- employed by, among others, historians, legal scholars, philosophers, opponents of the Eugenics Movement and sociologists of racism -- to denote a particular kind of alleged social relation, one which typically involves a right, advantage, exemption or immunity granted to or enjoyed by white persons beyond the common advantage of nonwhites. ...
Source


By that definition, I'd have to say that "white privilege" exists, sure. But I don't think it exists in 100% of life. I've said many times that racism exists, so yeah, that sometimes gives white people an advantage. I don't deny that.

But other privileges exist, too. Pretty Privilege (for employment), Female Privilege (for getting assistance), Male Privilege (for respect)... The list goes on.

If you look at a small part of the whole picture, you could even say that white privilege always exists within that framework, but if you look at the whole picture, you'll find that different people have different advantages in different areas of life. And I'm not saying it all equals out in the end, I'm just saying we all have to play with the cards we're dealt.

And I'm not suggesting that you don't fight for equality. But if you expect the so called "privileged" to lead the fight, especially when you have a grudge against them and think they enjoy their position, you're probably going to be disappointed.

If you see the fact that I'm white as the most important thing about me, then you might just see me as privileged overall. But to me, my whiteness isn't who I am at all. It does not define me. I never THINK about white privilege. I never even consider that I might have an advantage over someone else because I'm white. That makes me sick! So I can't agree that we all "enjoy" our white privilege. I never even thought about it untill I got involved in the discussions here.

It occurred to me as I was watching TV last night that there are SO many black people who have made great lives for themselves. They have fought and worked and there are successful black doctors, lawyers, actors, politicians, TV personalities, engineers, musicians... In every walk of life, there are successful black people. How do you explain this in light of the 100% white privilege theory?

As regards putting words in your mouth, I'm not meaning to. I'm simply trying to understand your viewpoint fully, as I believe you are mine. Just like your question above, I'm trying to clarify your position. I have no interest in making you wrong. I'm debating and discussing with you to try to clarify our thoughts and opinions on this subject. I really don't want it to degrade into a situation similar to the one with Ceci.

We're both strong, intelligent women and can both get a little snippy, but I hope we can always come back and keep going. This is important. And ya never know who might be reading all this.
We don't know what kind of positive effect our discussion might have. And I KNOW we're working toward the same goal.

Oh, and as regards OJ, I cheered when he was acquitted. We were outside during a fire drill at work so I could see a large group of people. They were stunned! But I knew that whether or not he was guilty, he was not proven guilty in a court of law and therefore deserved to be found innocent. And I was thrilled. Same for Michael Jackson.



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by HarlemHottie
Unlike garbage disposals, 'privilege' in America is a finite resource. If some people suck it all up, there's none left for the rest of us.

Bass-ackwards. Privilege is self-rejuvenating. My boss passes it to me, I pass it onto the next new hire. And so on. All that needs to be known is the secret handshake.


Someone could calculate the *exact* number of garbage disposals, if they wanted to, so their number is finite. Plus, after everybody has one, mfg would drop drastically.



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 02:59 PM
link   
Just because you don't think about privilege doesn't mean it doesn't occur. But when you see yourself being treated better than others, who is going to speak up? And when you've unwittingly used this privilege to be treated better than other races, you're going to fight others to retain this luxury. And then, when others call you on it, you are going to deny that you have it so that others will be "convinced" that you don't have it.

That is the hypocrisy that is going around.



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by ceci2006
Just because you don't think about privilege doesn't mean it doesn't occur.


I can only assume your talking to me since I'm the one who said I don't think about this white privilege.

I never said it didn't occur.


Originally posted by ceci2006
And when you've unwittingly used this privilege to be treated better than other races, you're going to fight others to retain this luxury. And then, when others call you on it, you are going to deny that you have it so that others will be "convinced" that you don't have it.


Sweet Jesus! You think you know me pretty well, don't you? I'd just like to remind you that knowing how YOU might act in a given situation doesn't necessarily mean that everyone will act the same.

For you to accuse me of fighting others to retain this privilege (that I don't even think about), and then lying about having it so that I can deceive other people into thinking that I don't have it shows me how different our ways of living and thinking and being in this life are...

You don't know me at all...



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by HarlemHottie

Originally posted by nextguyinline
Only a portion of your reasoning IMO can be attributed to racism. Most of it is better attributed to plain jane greed.

I'm sorry, I didn't get this. Would you mind explaining what you meant here?


I understood your music industry example to incorporate racism as the reason why
black rappers don't own or operate the industry. I was saying only a portion may be, and that it is most likely greed keeping people outta influential positions in the industry, black or whatever. Any industry actually. Money doesn't recognize color. If I own a company that pulls in 80% of the market, I would make decisions to make sure I kept that 80%. Whether it be Joe, Jesus, Leroy or Augustus trying to get into the market.

But typing right now, I'm thinking I don't know how many minorities own or have influential positions in the music industry, and that could effect my statement made in my last post. Ones I can think of now are countable on one hand. But I hope that explains what I meant before.






The loft I rent happened to come with a garbage disposal. I feel empathy for those without garbage disposals and would happily install one for someone without; but I don't refrain from using the priviledge every day.

Unlike garbage disposals, 'privilege' in America is a finite resource. If some people suck it all up, there's none left for the rest of us.


Well disposals are as finite as priviledge is. Until I can get to a position where I start making some of the rules, all I can do is play the game. :edit to ask: Do you believe you don't take advantage of black priviledge? If you do, have you ever refused it out of principle?





I think you mean if 'everybody' listened.

Maybe you're right. There are people, like donwhite, who listened.


Well I hope you understand that 'listening' doesn't mean doing things your way or believing what you believe, and how you believe it. I have listened to you, so have many others, thanks for leaving us out.





And is increasing every generation. It may not be quick enough, it may not be possible to achieve, but it is getting better.


I know, and I agree. Someone else, I can't remember who, said this a few pages back. My point is, we've been here since the very beginning (as evidenced by the Slave Codes of 1705). How much longer do I need to wait?


Why do you need a piece a paper to believe blacks were in america in 1705?
You need to wait as long is it takes.!!

[edit on 18-8-2006 by nextguyinline]



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 09:41 PM
link   


posted by ceci2006

Just because you don't think about privilege doesn't mean it doesn't occur. That is the hypocrisy that is going around.


1) Jacksonville has had 70 homicides so far this year. 55 victims were black. Yet the black population is only 32% of the 750,000 people living here. 8% are Hispanic and 3% are “other” Leaving about 57% to be white. I black person in 4,363 has been murdered this year. 1 white person in 28,250 has been murdered this year. If and I say again, if, the white population had the same murder rate as the blacks, then the white homicides this year would be 98 murdered white people instead of 15. I’ll bet you that would get the mayor’s attention. If it did not cost him his job.

2) One super tragedy. A single mother working as a nurses aide at $9.25 an hour, was living in a Section 8 apartment with her 11 year old daughter and 8 year old son. You know already without me saying it, this was in no gated community, being Section 8 and all that. Two months ago, just after dark, about 9:30 PM, shots were fired in the apartment complex. Mother told the 2 children to “hit the floor.” They did, but not fast enough. The 11 year old girl was hit by a stray bullet through the window of her bedroom. As mother held her daughter, she died. Her color? Guess.

3) Two black Jacksonville firemen reported to work to find a noose hanging in one man’s locker. A year earlier the other man had found the letters “KKK” scrawled in shoe polish on his locker door. No action had been taken by the all white FD hierarchy in the first case and none was likely in the second case.

The local Human Rights Commission took up the case and made an extensive investigation. The usual results, blacks held fewer supervisory positions than their numbers and years of experience would indicate. No blacks were in the top echelon of command. It looks like the FD is a white bastion!

The Commission recommended firing the chief and using an out of town selection committee to find a new chief. The mayor rejected the demands, saying he wanted the same thing the Commission wanted, a fair and law abiding FD, but he would not fire the Chief. So what’s the message? What does a FD chief have to do, or not do, to loose his job?

Is this condition novel. Is this unique? Is this 2006? Do you think things will be like this in 2106? What are we doing to make sure it is not like this in 2106?



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 10:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by donwhite
1) Jacksonville has had 70 homicides so far this year. 55 victims were black. Yet the black population is only 32% of the 750,000 people living here. 8% are Hispanic and 3% are “other” Leaving about 57% to be white. I black person in 4,363 has been murdered this year. 1 white person in 28,250 has been murdered this year. If and I say again, if, the white population had the same murder rate as the blacks, then the white homicides this year would be 98 murdered white people instead of 15. I’ll bet you that would get the mayor’s attention. If it did not cost him his job.

How much of that was black-on-black violence?


2)The 11 year old girl was hit by a stray bullet through the window of her bedroom. As mother held her daughter, she died. Her color? Guess.

Are we also supposed to guess the color of the shooters?



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 11:39 PM
link   
To tell you the truth BH, I was not directing my comment to you. I was just adding to the conversation. And yes, I do think that people who are afforded "privilege" have benefitted from it so much that they don't see the implications of it. Some people fully know that they have "white privilege". They aren't going to deny it. But they aren't going to let others have it. So, they are going to intimidate those who accuse them of having it so that the people doing the asking won't inquire any more.

But yes, I don't really know you. And you don't really know me either. But you are saying is that you don't want white privilege at all, is that right?

The problem with that is that you can't easily get rid of it. Since there are a whole group of people who benefit from the subtle effects of white privilege, you unwittingly get treated differently by other people anyway. The mind-set is already ingrained. And who from the white race is willing speak out against his or her brethen when it is a privilege worth keeping? Who is going to try and ruin it for everyone (who is white) in order for fairness to happen?

That would take a very brave person. And there are people in this world that aren't that courageous enough.

But, yes, I think it is a mind-set that some white people have. Let's be honest here. Some think that they are superior than the rest of us. They don't have to say it directly, but their entire speech and manner dictates it. Since their race is always validated by social institutions and the fact that they are able to easily get beneficial treatment, they are not going to let anyone have it--not for a minute. Who would want to give up that superiority in order for things to be more fair?

I think no one--not at the expense of the dominant culture.



[edit on 18-8-2006 by ceci2006]



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join