Go talk to creativesoul. He may have more patience than I. — Banno
But he won't be any less wrong. — Pro Hominem
I actually agree with this, as it is written. What does that have to do with white privilege? — creativesoul
Yes, you don't see the problem. Repeating that you don't see the problem does not help — Banno
The first statement is true. Some people experience irritation and/or are offended. However, it does not follow that all people do. However, the last statement only follows from the first, if all people did. They do not. So, it's an invalid conclusion for one, and actually false as well. — creativesoul
If it is pointed out to a white person that a black person was treated badly in a situation that both experienced, say a job interview or an encounter with a police officer, the proper response for the white person is not "I feel guilty and terrible that I was treated well", it is "I feel terrible that you were treated poorly", and hopefully they could agree to work together to try to change that in the future.
It is not necessary or helpful to demonize all white people for being white in order to try to improve conditions for people who are non-white.
— Pro Hominem
I actually agree with this, as it is written. What does that have to do with white privilege? — creativesoul
It is an exact statement of the actual meaning of the concept of white privilege. That is what is has to do with it.
You've literally just agreed that it is more effectual for people to be focused on uplifting people who are being oppressed than to be focused on shaming bystanders who are not actively participating in the oppression. You should agree with this because it's obviously true. Making people aware of oppression is not helped by trying to make the case that those people are wrong because they live in a world where oppression exists but they don't happen to be the object of it. — Pro Hominem
First, it's not a 'problem with the concept' at all. It is a distinguishing feature, and a very very useful one when implemented in the 'right' ways. White privilege is best understood in terms of what white individuals do not suffer from(what they are exempt from). That is precisely what privilege is. Please allow me to elaborate a bit, for it seems necessary... — creativesoul
I want to end white privilege — creativesoul
I use "white privilege" as it was taught to me by non whites. I draw correlations between "white privilege" and the actual negative effects/affects(personal injury) that systemic racism has had and continues to have upon non white individuals. We language users who employ "white privilege" in such a way are not saying that white people should feel guilty. We are most certainly not demonizing white people when discussing white privilege.
Discussions about white privilege can be focused upon uplifting people who are being oppressed. Discussion about white privilege do not require shaming bystanders who are not actually voluntarily participating in the oppression. Discussions of white privilege do not require trying to make the case that whites are somehow 'wrong' by virtue of benefitting from systemic racism.
What's 'wrong', if you insist upon talking like this, is not acknowledging that whites born in America are exempt from the liabilities of being non white in America — creativesoul
Not sure what you think I'm lying about, I have always been open and upfront about my contempt for the framing. If I agreed that white privilege was necessary, if I agreed that white privilege was an important marker, then my opposition makes no sense. — Judaka
Good, this is certainly part of the goal here. Do you find any single sense of "white privilege" more well-grounded than any other?
— creativesoul
I would agree that it is important to demonstrate the existence of systemic racism and part of that is by pointing out how imbalanced certain statistics are between the races. In the context where you're faced with someone who is denying systemic racism, the disparities you call white privilege need to be pointed out. — Judaka
There are many white people who openly say and actually believe that racism is not acceptable and it ought be removed from American society. Some of these white people come from areas in the country where there is very little ethnic and/or racial diversity, so they have had little to no personal experience and/or interactions with non whites. Rural America in particular simply does not have the degree of diversity that is common in the larger cities, particularly along the coastlines. Not everyone in these areas holds strong and clear racist belief against non whites, even if they come from a community where those remain in practice. They see racism when it's undeniably open and public, they know it's wrong, but they do not recognize the subtlety of white privilege. That takes someone else to show them in a manner that they're open and able to understand, which does not include personal attacks because they are white, as well as a white who is capable of listening to another's plight because they are not. It takes mutual respect.
— creativesoul
I am sympathetic here, you are coming from a similar position to me but with a different approach. I know that general views on racism can be a little simple, it can be frustrating. If people think that racism is just verbally insulting someone then you do need to show that it's more complicated than that. So I see the aspect of white privilege as a means to have people think more deeply about what racism is to be a stronger component of the framing. — Judaka
I completely understand what you're saying. I swear. — Pro Hominem
You've claimed both that you agree with my premisses(certain statements as written), and that you disagree with all of my premisses. Those two claims are mutually exclusive. They cannot both be true. The one is the negation of the other. If the former is true, the latter is not, and vice-versa. — creativesoul
White privilege ... is the ABSENCE of being treated unfairly because one is non-white. — Pro Hominem
It is not necessary or helpful to demonize all white people — Pro Hominem
It's not an analogy. It is an example. The disenfranchisement caused to non-ambulatory people is real. But thanks, by denying that this is a problem you have reinforce my view that privilege cannot be easily recognised by the privileged. — Banno
What privilege do I have that Oprah Winfrey doesn't have? And would you agree that Oprah has privileges that I don't have?Effectively ending racism requires understanding both it's motivations and it's effects/affects.
White privilege is an effect/affect of racism.
Effectively ending racism requires understanding white privilege. — creativesoul
Imagine thinking acknowledging privilege amounts to demonization. — StreetlightX
I believe that you believe that you completely understand what I'm saying. I, however, do not share the belief that you do, because there are some things you've written that prove otherwise.
We are close, though, it seems in our aim. — creativesoul
THE PROBLEM IS NOT SOME PEOPLE BEING TREATED APPROPRIATELY, THE PROBLEM IS SOME PEOPLE BEING TREATED INAPPROPRIATELY. — Pro Hominem
But 'the problem' is not white privilege, but the fact of it being unacknowledged in situations where it ought to be. As far as your purely nominal disagreement, it simply seems that irony is lost on you, and that if a white person feels 'resentment' at the term, then I'd venture that's exactly when the term is the most appropriate.
White people just don't like being racially marked. They think being so is only meant for others. This kind of hysterical reaction over nomination is exemplary of that. — StreetlightX
I argue against it because it is inaccurate and counterproductive. — Pro Hominem
the dissonance between what ought to be a state of 'normalcy' and it having count as a privilege is precisely the point of the term. It draws its critical power from precisely the uneasy collapse of the two. — StreetlightX
It's not enough that it ought to have that power, it needs to actually have it, and that's an empirical matter. It either will or will not result in the necessary change — Isaac
No. The phrase is a framing device. It draws attention to a feature a reality. That's all. — StreetlightX
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.