Butthurt white guys, an Asian virgin and an angry lesbian walk into a bar...

Tanoomba_sl said:

There you go. Lithose has officially backed me up on my major points. Fuck all y'all, bitches!

Click to expand...

Yes, there is nothing wrong with saying; on average--if you're white you are statistically going to have a better shot, that's just statistically true and I can easily acknowledge it. However, on the same token I can say; if you're black, you're more likely to go to jail. That's not racist to say,not at all.It's just a fact of statistics. The racism comes when you use that statistic as acausation, or you boil it down to an individual label and try to paste it on someone (Or "shame" them for not accepting it as a label; like say, by calling them an asshole ). It's a subtle distinction, but let me elaborate.

Black people on average commit more crimes per capita; right? Yet we consider it racist when say, a store owner scrutinizes black customers. Why? Because we're attributing an abstract to that individual. And that is racist--which is why there is no "check your crime level" saying. Because it would beabhorrentlyracist.

On the same token, white people gain access to more opportunities (Whatever quantity we wish to measure). However, if I'm talking to a white person and I tell him him to "check his privilege" when he makes an argument; because somehow his position is affected by it--I see it as the same species of racism that fuels things like profiling.

I'mattributing an abstract to an individual; with no knowledge of thatindividualscircumstance or handicaps. Which is why; anytime a feminist, or some other group uses "check your privilege" to denounce an argument it makes my eyesbleed. It's the exact same species of bigotry as if a man were to say a woman's comment on engineering was less valid simply due to the onus that she is a woman; because women are less likely to be engineers (Amazing self fulfilling stereotype there--and Khalid is right, it DOES happen). It's just blind sexism/racism using abstracted statistics as justification for individual judgements that should be rendered based off of much more information about the individual.

This gets even more complex when we consider the fact that the whole concept of privilege is different within classes of people that we supposedly lump together. Bill Clinton's brat has far more privilege than any white person's, on this board, kid will have. But in these arbitrarily grouped abstracts, her privilege now becomes theirs because of a specious connection of skin color. It's not a "perfect" classification system by any stretch, and thus it really shouldn't be tossed out in an argument as some kind of show stopper. And yet it IS; a lot, every day I see it more and more like it's some valid way to shame people to stop talking, and all it is, is a vile form of racism, sexism, or bigotry being raised under the auspices of "noble equality".

(And then there is the dreaded thing no one wants to whisper; like our incarceration statistic. You said maybe men just commit more serious crimes. And I agree; I think there is some sexual dimorphism in violent crimes for example. So it would be incredibly stupid to attempt to even out the prison population by creating stiffer sentences for women right? Yeah..of course it would. And for the same reason as stiffer sentences would be silly--using privilige as anything more than an abstract thought for further observation isALSOsilly--because there could be a SLEW of different reasons for inequality of outcomes that don't have to deal with racism or sexism. Yet it's being used a rallying cry for quotas and all kinds of draconian "equality" measures; and for what? Because of some correlative connection based on skin color, or gender? This is why the whole concept is becoming dangerous. Many groups are using a term that should be used to prompt study; to instead promote legal institutional change.)

Tanoomba_sl said:

That's based on religious belief, not skin color. I will give you that Irish is an exception at certain time periods.


That's based on wealth disparity, not skin color.


Of course not. But whatever difficulties they would encounter would not be based on their skin color.

Click to expand...

Yes, Tan. Again, you touch on it with a knife. You're claiming that white people are privileged in one breath, but then admitting that white people have been persecuted, enslaved and killed for everythingoutside of their skin color. Don't you see how this makes classifying people byskin colorseem...inadequate? Even a littlemyopic? As Chaos said, it's an extreme reductionism; and I tend to agree.

Again, I don't take issue with a big abstract picture of "hey, on average whites will have more opportunities"--that's just the truth. It's ALSO "the truth" that said classification isseverelylacking for "real world" application. It's good for furtherobservation, it's a good start point to maybe view things with a more refined lens. But it's not really strong enough to tell someone that their point of view is skewed "because privilege". It's certainly not strong enough that someone should be considered an asshole for not "acknowledging"theirprivilege (See how when it becomes personal, it becomes bad) when we've established that due to various deficiencies in the categorization--said person might NOT have experienced the vaunted "privilege" that he was statistically engendered to.

Or a more specific example: Poor kid on a defunct Kentucky coal mine; who goes off to the army to escape crushing poverty and then dies in Iraq didn't really experience all the wonderful white privilege that I did when I got my degree--so why should he "acknowledge" the privilege in the same way? And you may say you're NOT asking someone to do that but you did call someone an asshole forNOTdoing that in this thread, without knowing a thing about them--so I think we all understand what the "end game" of this privilege concept is, don't we? Lets not play cat and mouse here.

Lithose_sl said:

Again, I don't take issue with a big abstract picture of "hey, on average whites will have more opportunities"--that's just the truth. It's ALSO "the truth" that said classification is severely lacking for "real world" application. It's good for further observation, it's a good start point to maybe view things with a more refined lens. But it's not really strong enough to tell someone that their point of view is skewed "because privilege". It's certainly not strong enough that someone should be considered an asshole for not "acknowledging" their privilege (See how when it becomes personal, it becomes bad) when we've established that due to various deficiencies in the categorization--said person might NOT have experienced the vaunted "privilege" that he was statistically engendered to. (Poor kid on a defunct Kentucky coal mine; who goes off to the army to escape crushing poverty and then dies in Iraq didn't really experience all the wonderful white privilege that I did when I got my degree--so why should he "acknowledge" the privilege in the same way? And you may say you're NOT asking someone to do that but you did call someone an asshole for NOT doing that in this thread, without knowing a thing about them.)

Click to expand...

This is exactly the problem. Whining about the perceived privilege of someone else in a passive-aggressive way doesn't accomplish anything. It's feel good victim-hood bullshit. At least creating a lobbyist group or a movement or whatever the fuck actually gets you somewhere. This is like the retarded millennial hipster version of civil rights marches. It's so fucking underground, no one actually cares.

Tanoomba_sl said:

You're a dumb idiot who doesn't know stuff about stuff, I don't have a counter argument because all of my posts are emotional responses. EMOTIONS EMOTIONS EMOTIONS, ILETS ALL GET TOGETHER AND CRY AT THE PITTY PARTY WHERE ALL FEMALE GODDESS ON THE INSIDE WEEEEEOOOOOOOWOOOOOOOWWWWWEEEEEWOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

Click to expand...

.

This thread: Marxists find increasingly convoluted ways to be dumb.

I prefer my racism honest. My Pops, he despises mexians. I mean he really just hates them, for no fucking reason really besides for they aren't white, and it's getting worse the older he gets.

I can deal with that. He makes no apologies.

But this intellectually dishonest racism just turns my stomach.

I think we should move this thread to the general forum, it's a shame to have so much text and so few pics in a screenshot thread !

Tanoomba_sl said:

Are you kidding me? It's beennothing butin question since my first post (example: See below). If you're telling me that you understand white male privilege exists, then guess what? We're on the same page, brother! Welcome to the reasonable people club! Not as exclusive a club as it was yesterday afternoon, but the more the merrier!

Click to expand...

No, that isn't what is in question. What IS in question is the way you come to these sweeping conclusions and provide nothing other than "it is apparent" and Louis CK. Or the idea that I need to somehow ceaselessly be "aware" of the idea of this. And of course there is there that final level of moral judgement you are hesitant to lay at the feet of the oppressors, at least openly, but as Lithose says we all know where this leads, you're just being coy.

Soygen_sl said:

I think I'm just going to merge this with the male rape thread.

Click to expand...

Doesn't exist right?! I remember being assigned a seat on the bus during a field trip and this fat chick that sat with me kept grabbing my hand and trying to put it on her boob. Thin white male privilege for not wanting to grope a fat white girl I guess.

So is tanooba a guy? So do you have to jerk yourself off when she's going with the strap on or does she give reach around. It's ok. We've all let our ladies finger our ass once.