Real Talk about White Privilege

page: 38
12
<< 35  36  37    39  40 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 29 2007 @ 05:25 PM
link   
I have an insured of mine in here right now ... She is Black .. Just so you all know .. Sweetest lady in the world. How she afforded to buy her a 2007 White HUMMER H3 is beyond me .. She says she bought it with her Retirement money. But this should be a point that I can't get financed for anything ... I am trying to get a car for me and my WHITE Fiance and although I am WHITEand trying to get a loan for her. I can't get it, why isn't my WHITENESS Totally taking over and why can I not get something that this Black lady has or even half of that. Maybe it is because of my white OPRESSION !!! LOL



It must not have anything to do with my credit .. Must be just that I am White .... I know it .. I knew those guys had it in for me ...


[edit on 29-3-2007 by Deus_Brandon]




posted on Mar, 29 2007 @ 08:02 PM
link   
Okay, it has been said that some white posters recognize "white privilege".

The question for white people who do recognize it is what are they going to do with the knowledge.

Sit on their collective derrieres and do nothing about it?

Cut the crap and discuss it in order to understand the concepts better?

Or bury their heads in the sand, pretending and denying that they aren't a part of it?

That's the key question here. White people must come to grips that this is an occurrence in society. They must force themselves to see society in this new guise and deal with it.

It's not only the responsibility of members of color to discuss this. White members must also be responsible for trying to deal with these effects too.

White privilege is something that one cannot hold away from them because this happens to us all, collectively as a nation.

And collectively, we must be able to discuss this without deviation or deflection. White members must especially be brave enough not to attack the message, the messenger or descend into aspects that have nothing to do with the issue.

I give my respect to those very few that have faced this head on without anger or frustration. And I especially give my respect to those who see the issue as it is without resorting to other tactics to continue to shield themselves from discussing this.

This has nothing to do with revenge or resentment. This is a condition that needs to be discussed in society because it happens to all racially. It is responsible for many aspects that occur in today's society. And it is time to stop not "seeing" it or throwing everything but the kitchen sink so that one cannot talk about it.



posted on Mar, 29 2007 @ 08:10 PM
link   
It's ok Truthseeka, I knew you couldn't resist responding.

You told me your race 30+ pages ago. I'm not psychic.

But I'm still confused, on what more you want from this thread. You and others have created tangent points, other than white priviledge, that I heartily welcomed and commented on, but when I ask the hard questions, you and others duck and run, and refuse to answer. I think you can't answer, because the answers don't fit with your perceptions. You would in essence be shooting yourselves in the foot, and have to reconsider the perceptions that you have allowed to become rooted in your minds.

I'm really not sure why you are so angry with me, other than the point I made above.

Maybe you can answer my questions, since your so in tune with the black community?

Maybe my questions are now inappropriate for the thread, as they aren't directly pertaining to white priviledge, but that's not for me to decide. If they aren't then IMO the thread is done - unless some new posters come along and give you a one line response of yay or nay to the existance of white priviledge. So send me your answers via u2u if you see fit, I don't mind, I just want someone to answer.



posted on Mar, 29 2007 @ 08:21 PM
link   
So Ceci, if someone wanted to discuss your post about the retarded white guy movie, who's Captain, evily stole the retarded blacks guys shrimp business idea, they are deflecting?

What if they wanted to discuss your post about linguistic gymnastics? Are they again deflecting?

What if they wanted to discuss your post about mysterious board downtimes when race discussions are started? Again, deflecting?

You can't have it both ways. You can't regulate the thread to allow yourself to make a rainbow of points and not allow others to rebut - hollering 'deflection' everytime anyone does.

These threads die, and go away because of posts like yours, not posts like mine. You stem the discussions you so adamantly wish to have. Sometimes discussions are hard, sometimes you won't hear what you want to, and most of the time you won't change minds in the immediate.

And I'll reiterate again, white priviledge exists, white people benefit from that priviledge, some knowingly, some unknowingly.



posted on Mar, 29 2007 @ 08:33 PM
link   
You are personally attacking them by not agreeing with their every word. Kneel down before the PC masters at submit that they must be right. You just have to remember that there is nothing too logically that can't be overcome.



posted on Mar, 29 2007 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by nextguyinline
It's ok Truthseeka, I knew you couldn't resist responding.


Like they say, ja ja ja...

I REFUSE to address any questions you have. If it were up to me, I'd ban you from my thread, but alas, I can't do that.



posted on Mar, 29 2007 @ 10:20 PM
link   
It's ok again Truthseeka. I didn't expect you would.

It can be a difficult thing to swallow, to be called out on one's front. I'm sure you'll be ok though, you seem like an intelligent fellow.

You should of complained about the misrepresentation of your compensation, but to each his own. I actually think you made it up, but hey, keep on keepin' on.



posted on Mar, 29 2007 @ 10:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by nextguyinline
You may not like it, but unfortunately, your white,


Is this true, truthseeka? Are you white?

No kidding... No deflection, just answer the question. Have you been "acting black" all this time and your'e really white?



posted on Mar, 29 2007 @ 10:31 PM
link   
You know what?

You two mo...

Chissler, will you PLEASE do something about these false allegations against me. PLEASE. I REALLY don't want to be an acehole about this. I'm trying REAL hard to maintain myself...


If Chissler isn't around right now, will another mod PLEASE do something about this?



posted on Mar, 29 2007 @ 11:28 PM
link   
Tell me people. When you are lying dead, face down in a hole somewhere, do you think it really matters what color you are?



posted on Mar, 29 2007 @ 11:39 PM
link   
Don't know yet.

But we are living now, where color unfortunately does matter.



posted on Mar, 30 2007 @ 12:27 AM
link   


Shooter...come on, I know you're above stuff like this. Of COURSE, if someone gives a description of a suspect, the cops would be insane to look for someone who didn't fit the description. HOWEVER, you know full well this is FAR different from pulling over innocent people because they're not white.

Stuff like what. I stated that I thought the profiling you sourced about was wrong and without excuse. I just was wondering what you thought about how the police should find suspects.




So, the solution to salary discrimination is to go to another job? What about the next black person who takes that position? Same thing will happen to them. This is quite similar to "if you don't like racism in America, just LEAVE" rhetoric.


No if I felt discrimintated against not only would I find another job, I would sue. Hit them in the wallet and they will change their ways. It has nothing to do with retoric. It has to do with what you will settle for. You allow someone to discriminate and they will.




And no, I haven't seen that film. But, I DO want to. I've seen clips of it, and it looks pretty damn good. But at the same time, you can't use this film to say that every race has an equal shot in this country. It's kinda like using the "model minority," Asians, to justify maintaining the status quo as far as the racial hierarchy goes.

Just why can't you use that film to show everyone has an equal shot? It was based on a TRUE story. The guy was a minority,a single parent,poor enough to sleep on trains and in restrooms; and still achieved the American dream. I think the guy is an inspiration to all people not just to minorities. I in no way think he is the "model minority". I think he is an exceptional person who just happens to be black. Like it or not the story is proof that if you have the will you can get anywhere in this country.



posted on Mar, 30 2007 @ 12:59 AM
link   


That's fine and well, but that's not the issue here.

You said it was.


Yes, when white people use it as a judgement about race and character without taking the entire situation into context.





The perception (whenever I hear this said in a mixed race group and a white person says this) is that the people of color cannot maturely have a discussion of this caliber. Usually, it is the other way around.

The perception of who? White people in general? Broadbrush statements about minorities are "white privilege";what would one call these broad brush statements about white people?




I'm glad you don't. But again, this isn't the issue. It is the discussion concerning whether white people are aware of what they say to people of color in discussions like these. And whether white people really think about what they say to persons of color and have the ability to ignore certain aspects of the conversation, let alone write them off because of 'deflection'.

It is the issue. Is this a "do not speak until spoken to" converstaion? With out opinions there would be no discussion about "white privilege".
Why are white people singled out as to having to "think" about what they say? Shouldn't everyone think about what they say?




That's what you think.



This has nothing to do with that.

No ,C, it is not what I think , it is what is written in the constitution. It is specifically a first amendment right.
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Freedom of speech, and the right to peaceably assemble, which imho is what we are all doing here. Being able to voice your opinion has everything to do with freedom. Wasn't that what the CRM ,at least in part, was all about? Being able to equally voice your opinion? No one has to agree with ones opinion, but all are entitled to it no matter how wrong it may be.



We're Americans too. And we should not have to be subjected to this type of talk.

Well as Americans you should understand freedom of speech. No type of "talk" should ever be discouraged. You have only to look to the current administration to see what happens when people don't talk.



There is never a sense of fairness when it comes to discussions. White posters, no matter how badly they write or spell, are afforded with intelligence and believability.

Fairness would be defined as to personal opinion would it not? Why would you assume the color of someone on the other side of the screen? Why would you assume I believe anything anyone posts on ats, let alone the "white people"? Have you read some of the posts here? Ufo's,chupacabra,bigfoot,...shall I go on? Is there anything fundamentally different or more credible about the "social issues" section of abovepolitics than any other section of ats?

Don't get me wrong I really like ats,but it is still just a internet forum. If you are really looking for credibilty and true objective discussion, I think there are other places much better than internet forums.

BTW who you got in the tourney this weekend?



posted on Mar, 30 2007 @ 02:02 AM
link   
Truthseeka,

After seeing your last reply, I went back to the beginning of the thread and looked over our first conversation. I am now thinking that you are a black man, and I made a bad judgement from the content of your posts. I'm not 100% positive, but your last reply, has made me question my perception again.

So in light of this, I retract all I've had to say concerning you, because simply, it isn't relevant. I was addressing you as a white man. Not a white man pretending to be a black man on the internet, but in a white kid growing up in the bronx kind of thing. I assure you that I was not accusing you of being a fraud.

So I can only ask that you can forgive my mis-perception, but I can see that as a black man, my comments could be taken as inappropriate and downright rude. If our roles were reversed, I would be angry also, and I suppose I would have a hard time forgiving you right away as well, but I would eventually, so I hope you can too. Besides, I'm on your side concerning the white priviledge topic.



posted on Mar, 30 2007 @ 02:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by shooterbrody
You said it was.


After thinking about it, you're correct. I did say that an opinion can be afforded to white privilege. And I meant it, especially when some language is used in order to "dismiss" or "minimalize" the experiences of people of color in this area. However, I'd like to clarify that when this is being done, I truly think that some whites don't use their conscience and opt for oblviousness when dealing with issues of race. This also relates to not taking everything into context. If they did, you wouldn't have some of the patronising answers that one gets on race-relations discussions and threads.

After all, it is a privilege for white persons to not think about their color or their race all the time because their heritage, upbringing and race is validated constantly in society. Subsequently, they have the luxury to not "see" race.



The perception of who?


My perception.


White people in general?


Not all white people, of course. But, this is what I mostly see in discussions. For example, some white posters on this thread (and some of my other threads) knowingly say derogatory things and not feel any sense of conscience saying them. And it continues throughout the entire thread especially when the words of some whites fall into a script: ("I don't see color", "Color doesn't matter to me much", "You're screaming and crying about race", "This is all about reparations again", "You hate white people", "Go back to Africa.") These are especially indicative of not only my threads about race. I've seen this on truthseeka's thread as well as the ones about reparations. These lines by white posters on the topic of race usually say the same things without any deviation.

That's why I think that it must be a privilege for some whites not to truly think about the repercussions of one's words and how they affect others. It allows them be rude without any sense of conscience. And some other whites can read these phrases and silently do nothing about them. Again, it's the "Good German" syndrome at work here.

In my perception, this is usually a sign that some are not ready to discuss race. And, instead of letting others engage in discussing race, some members have to be snide, pernicious and uncouth in their statements.

Because the "privilege" is in full effect, some white posters feel almost entitled to say these things without ever thinking about how their words might affect others. So, yes, I think that some white people cannot handle being in a race-related discussion without attacking the messenger, attacking the message or throwing the subject so it won't be talked about. However, this is not the behavior of all whites. There are white people who can discuss issues of race with insight and restraint. I am glad to have a discussion with understanding white people who do not deviate from the topic and face the issue head-on without a sense of fear.

So, I take all of these things into account in studying the language and actions used in race-related talks. It's all data to me.


Broadbrush statements about minorities are "white privilege";what would one call these broad brush statements about white people?


Observations of the behaviors of white people during race-related discussions.



It is the issue. Is this a "do not speak until spoken to" converstaion?


No.


With out opinions there would be no discussion about "white privilege".


That is if some white people can bring themselves to discuss the issue without trying to use tactics to avoid it.


Why are white people singled out as to having to "think" about what they say?


Because in threads about race, it is usually some white posters who can't contain themselves when it comes to derogatory comments and behavior. And honestly, if someone has to say, "Go back to Africa", they aren't usually thinking about the feelings of non-white people.

It means to me that they are unable to identify with non-white people. Language and action demonstrates this aspect.


Shouldn't everyone think about what they say?


You would hope so. But, white people especially--because of their privilege--treat their language differently because their behavior--due to color--is given a pass. I'm sorry that this is a controversial statement, but in a lot of cases there have even been white politicians and celebrities that have said the most heinous things ("Get over slavery", "Welfare Queen", "tar baby", etc.) and get reassuring comments in the press for saying it. They are celebrated and validated in popular culture for not having a conscience about what they say. It's called political incorrectness.




No ,C, it is not what I think , it is what is written in the constitution. It is specifically a first amendment right.


So what about shouting, "Fire!" in a crowded building? Is that also a First Amendment right?




Freedom of speech, and the right to peaceably assemble, which imho is what we are all doing here.


I'd also say that non-white people are redressing grievances as well. But hardly, this thread was peaceable due to the lack of conscience some white posters had in venting their frustration and rage in order to not speak about white privilege.


Being able to voice your opinion has everything to do with freedom. Wasn't that what the CRM ,at least in part, was all about?


In parts. But the Civil Rights Movement was also about equal access to all social systems as well as the call for America to treat non-white people and women as full citizens in the country. Not to mention, treating non-white people as civilized human beings instead of the derogatory stereotypes which fueled the Jim Crow era.



Being able to equally voice your opinion? No one has to agree with ones opinion, but all are entitled to it no matter how wrong it may be.


In your perspective, you are right. But this still points to the "myth of meritocracy". You seem to think that we have an equal society now. We don't. And white privilege is one of the aspects of society which demonstrates the glaring disparities in the system--especially when it has to do with racism.


Well as Americans you should understand freedom of speech. No type of "talk" should ever be discouraged. You have only to look to the current administration to see what happens when people don't talk.


You're right. But, when does "talk" become abusive? And with the freedom of speech comes with responsibility. Or else, people could shout, "Fire" in a crowded building and cause bodily harm and injury to others.


Fairness would be defined as to personal opinion would it not?


No. You're thinking of the "myth of meritocracy" again. People can earn all the merits in the world. This is especially the case when it comes down to having the merit of having one's opinion taken seriously. But that doesn't stop the descrepancy in treatment afforded to speech. And it doesn't account for the sense of respect and responsbility afforded to it.


Why would you assume the color of someone on the other side of the screen?


Because people don't leave their perceptions and attitudes about race at the door when they get on the internet. This thread alone should teach you that.


Why would you assume I believe anything anyone posts on ats, let alone the "white people"?


Statistically (by the Pew research and media studies), most Internet users are white people. In fact, some studies discuss the "digital divide".



Have you read some of the posts here? Ufo's,chupacabra,bigfoot,...shall I go on?


I have. But still that doesn't erase the fact that most Internet users are white.


Is there anything fundamentally different or more credible about the "social issues" section of abovepolitics than any other section of ats?


Well, social issues deal with society. And people ought to pay it a lot more respect, along with racial issues. But somehow, sources don't get treated very well when it comes to race-related discussions here.


Don't get me wrong I really like ats,but it is still just a internet forum. If you are really looking for credibilty and true objective discussion, I think there are other places much better than internet forums.


You're right. However, people ought to have enough common sense to treat this topic like any other: like an intellectual discussion. Instead, people use this topic as a way to vent their frustrations instead of studying the aspects of race with the same rigor as they would anything else.


BTW who you got in the tourney this weekend?


Georgetown and UCLA.
I don't like Florida (or Billy Donovan) and Ohio St (I'm a big Michigan fan).



[edit on 30-3-2007 by ceci2006]



posted on Mar, 30 2007 @ 07:29 AM
link   
One more time people. Discuss the subject, and not the person. Stop asking questions like "Are you white" etc...



posted on Mar, 30 2007 @ 08:32 AM
link   
This may have been missed, being at the end of page 37 (and may be in the same situation here
), but I really am curious...

What Next?



posted on Mar, 30 2007 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by truthseeka

The job posting said $10/hr. When the lady interviewed and then hired me, she told me I would make $10/hr. When I got my check a month later, I was paid 8$/hr.


Where was this?

Did you continue working for them, demand your originally quoted salary, or quit?



posted on Mar, 30 2007 @ 10:57 AM
link   
I wonder about that, too, phoenix.

truthseeka, did you have anything in writing (a job offer) that promised the original salary? Because this is just wrong!

I'm wondering about this because if you continued working for this company and didn't do something about the discrepancy, and instead chalked it up to "white privilege" and just let it happen, you're as guilty as any white person who doesn't DO SOMETHING about it when we come across it.

I don't mean that as an attack, I'm seriously trying to understand how white privilege is allowed to go on in this country today. I mean, sometimes it's hard to define and distinguish, but this seems a clear case of racism/discrimination/white privilege and I'd hope something was done about it.



posted on Mar, 30 2007 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by phoenixhasrisin
Where was this?

Did you continue working for them, demand your originally quoted salary, or quit?


When I got my check, I immediately went to the b.itch who hired me. I asked her why I was paid 8 when she told me I'd be paid 10. She said what are you talking about, I told you 8. I said NO, you told me 10. She said, NO, I told you I was hiring you at 8, REMEMBER?


I had found the job through an internet job bank. So, after this snake lied to my face, I went back to the job bank to find the job posting. Unfortunately, it was no longer there. So, I basically had no proof. Other managers I complained to about this agreed. They thought what happened was spitty, but they told me it was my word against hers without the job posting evidence. Hell, if I'd have known I would be screwed for being black, I would have printed out the job posting before I even applied.

You see, I was quite naive about the depths of white privilege, discrimination, and the penalties for being black back then; I believed the lie that everyone has a fair shot these days, regardless of race.
And, when my cousin would tell me the kind of things I now know, I would let it go in one ear and out the other. I thought like most white people, that he was blowing things out of proportion. But man, was he RIGHT about how they do black people in America.:shk:

Looking back, I actually feel stupid for not listening to him then. But, I'm not being conned by the establishment any more. I KNOW what the real deal is now.





new topics
top topics
 
12
<< 35  36  37    39  40 >>

log in

join