White Privilege

[PocketZeven]

People act like white people have never had it tough in America.

I guess you didnt read through the whole thread. There already was established that discrimination already was there against irish, jewish, gypsies and Italian. However one can argue if the discrimination it still the same in current times. I can imagine jews and italians still face discrimination in some places in the USA. As is established during the synagogue shooting.

 

[Sage Ages]

People act like white people have never had it tough in America.

Depends on what is considered to be "white".

 

[McLaren]

I guess you didnt read through the whole thread. There already was established that discrimination already was there against irish, jewish, gypsies and Italian. However one can argue if the discrimination it still the same in current times. I can imagine jews and italians still face discrimination in some places in the USA. As is established during the synagogue shooting.

The only place I could ever assume Italians or even Irish folks are being discriminated against is up in the Northeast where much of it began. The rest of the US, Italians are praised for their food & the Irish are joked about for their drinking. I don't think discrimination against either specifically, is even a thing anymore. It'd more than likely come down to one's race than nationality.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Depends on what is considered to be "white".

No it's pretty obvious what is considered Anglo-Sax white, and since those people discussed are Anglo-Sax White to play dumb otherwise is an insult of intelligence. Which ironically enough the last five pages of this thread I've seen a person do that to several note worthy users of this forum. I guess said game will continue.

 

[HenrySwanson]

I don't really see it in the UK. If anything I'd say we, as in people of colour have had the pendulum swing in our favour in that we have greater protections and opportunities

 

[PocketZeven]

No it's pretty obvious what is considered Anglo-Sax white, and since those people discussed are Anglo-Sax White to play dumb otherwise is an insult of intelligence. Which ironically enough the last five pages of this thread I've seen a person do that to several note worthy users of this forum. I guess said game will continue.

I just learned the term WASP (White Anglo-Saxon Protestants) as being the dominant white people in the US. Perhaps the title of this thread should be changed to WASP privilege

 

[Danoff]

I just learned the term WASP (White Anglo-Saxon Protestants) as being the dominant white people in the US. Perhaps the title of this thread should be changed to WASP privilege

 

[Liquid]

For a long time Italians were considered, or at least presented as, "not white" by WASPs, whether in war or not.

So yes, when Italians had it tough back in the day, it was because they weren't white. I'm sure the fact that they weren't Protestant didn't help either.

 

[BobK]

I just learned the term WASP (White Anglo-Saxon Protestants) as being the dominant white people in the US. Perhaps the title of this thread should be changed to WASP privilege

Why? Seems to me that the title of the thread should be "majority privilege". Unless the real topic here is more white-bashing.

 

[Biggles]

For a long time Italians were considered, or at least presented as, "not white" by WASPs, whether in war or not.

Here you are ... updated for the present:

 

[mustafur]

Even though it's incorrect, considering the largest group of white people in America have German backgrounds rather then Anglo.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Americans

 

[UKMikey]

 

[PocketZeven]

Why? Seems to me that the title of the thread should be "majority privilege". Unless the real topic here is more white-bashing.

I agree with you.
The thread was more USA centric. Didn’t mean to suggest it had specifically to do with white people as a whole. But in the case of the USA WASP are the dominant and most influential group.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Anglo-Saxon_Protestant

 

[SestoScudo]

What does it mean to be white to be honest.

I saw some Arabs, Turks and Assyrians that look white lmaoo

Chechens, Dagistanis and Georgians who are all native to the Caucasus but they are not indo european per say but their own group called the Caucasians they are White.

 

[PocketZeven]

What does it mean to be white to be honest.

I saw some Arabs, Turks and Assyrians that look white lmaoo

Chechens, Dagistanis and Georgians who are all native to the Caucasus but they are not indo european per say but their own group called the Caucasians they are White.

Exactly. It is based on bias, perception and prejudice. Yet somehow in this society it still exists. Like in my country there is this holiday called sinterklaas and it is a holiday where a holyman comes from spain to handsout gifts to children who have been good and take them back to spain in a bag if they are bad. instead of having elves to help him he has "servants" called zwarte piet or black pete:

While the majority of the white dutch people claim it is not racist and only a children's holiday. I dont know of any foreigner who cant get over how racist it is to their perception. Similar to how people claim there is no "privilege" to a certain dominant ethnicity they just cant objectively see how for others there is obviously racism there.

 

[BobK]

I agree with you.
The thread was more USA centric. Didn’t mean to suggest it had specifically to do with white people as a whole. But in the case of the USA WASP are the dominant and most influential group.

Why are we singling out the USA? A "dominant", "privileged" group exists in pretty much every society. What makes the USA so special in that respect? Better to be black in the US than white in South Africa. So why not discuss the South African situation?

 

[PocketZeven]

Why are we singling out the USA? A "dominant", "privileged" group exists in pretty much every society. What makes the USA so special in that respect? Better to be black in the US than white in South Africa. So why not discuss the South African situation?

The discussion has been about the USA, but feel free to dicus other parts of the world.

 

[Rallywagon]

I would say change the name to class, or maybe specific group privilege. At the threat of having to laboriously defend my position. I would argue that precieved privilege all tribalism. Macro tribalism, but all the same. The tribe that has the precieved privilege will want to keep that privilege, and the tribes that dont, will want to take it. One way to do that is to demonize the ones that do have it. And so, in the US, its called white privilege. But, that is a bit way to broad, since most white people really dont have the privilege the term conjures. It just so happens that most of the truly affluent people in the US are white. As you point out Pocket.
Which is the socially insidious thing about it. Since I have a fair complexion I clearly have white privilege, never mind the fact that I've never received that "privilege" and my ancestors have never had that privilege being irish and native american. since it's a group mentality, and I look like I fit into that group, I must have benefited from it.
But like BobK says, and backs up my theory. I certainly wouldnt have any sort of "white privilege" in China, or India. Even in a country like, say, Scotland, that is predominantly white, since I dont speak like the locals, probably wouldn't see the "privilege" there. I'm just not a part of that tribe.
To be honest. I dont really see that changing. At least not any time soon. I think it's to engrained into our nature. Tribalism is how we evolved to survive. Its going to take a lot more social cooperation that we just arent at yet to get passed it.

 

[huskeR32]

Since I have a fair complexion I clearly have white privilege, never mind the fact that I've never received that "privilege" and my ancestors have never had that privilege being irish and native american. since it's a group mentality, and I look like I fit into that group, I must have benefited from it.

As I pointed out four months ago, you're fighting a bit of a strawman here. The idea of "white privilege" doesn't say that you've just had stuff handed to you. It says that if you and a person of color both spend your lives with the same goals, you'll both face some barriers along the way, and you'll both have to work hard to get there. However, none of the barriers you face will be because of your race. For the person of color? A couple of those barriers probably will be because of their race. A lifetime of similar choices and efforts might get them only 90% of what you end up getting, or they do achieve basically the same level of success, but had to work just a bit harder to get there.

Both of these realities can exist. You still worked hard for what you got; someone else facing an extra barrier or two along the way doesn't lessen that. Nobody is saying you're a lazy freeloader who had success just magically handed to you. These indignant responses you offer up are to an argument nobody is making.

 

[Danoff]

A lifetime of similar choices and efforts might get them only 90% of what you end up getting, or they do achieve basically the same level of success, but had to work just a bit harder to get there.

....assuming that everything else is equal. And that's a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you assume that one person has one disadvantage, and the other person is identical but doesn't have it, then voila, you've just ensured that your outcome is that one of them will have to work a bit harder.

In reality, there are so many disadvantages one might have that "white privilege" is meaningless. You could be beauty-privileged, or muscle-privileged, or height-privileged, or wealthy-parents-privileged, or protected-class-privileged, or smart-privileged, or likeable-priveleged, or intact-family privileged, or non-abused-child-privileged, or educated-parents-privileged, or health-privileged.

White-privilege isn't even always a privilege in all circumstances. There are plenty of examples where a non-white person has real tangible advantages over white people.

This is why people keep saying "I never received that privilege", because the term itself is meaningless. It's attempting to isolate something universal (disadvantage) and focus on it for only one group. It feels wrong to a lot of people because it is wrong.

I'd rather be black and have loving parents than white and not have them. I'd rather be black and beautiful than white and ugly. So what are we talking about?

 

[Rallywagon]

As I pointed out four months ago, you're fighting a bit of a strawman here. The idea of "white privilege" doesn't say that you've just had stuff handed to you. It says that if you and a person of color both spend your lives with the same goals, you'll both face some barriers along the way, and you'll both have to work hard to get there. However, none of the barriers you face will be because of your race. For the person of color? A couple of those barriers probably will be because of their race. A lifetime of similar choices and efforts might get them only 90% of what you end up getting, or they do achieve basically the same level of success, but had to work just a bit harder to get there.

Both of these realities can exist. You still worked hard for what you got; someone else facing an extra barrier or two along the way doesn't lessen that. Nobody is saying you're a lazy freeloader who had success just magically handed to you. These indignant responses you offer up are to an argument nobody is making.

I'll also never be the beneficiary of affirmative action either. That is an actual privilege. Let's forget the fact that you are speaking in absolutes, you're also speaking as if you know me or my story.
Danoff sums up the rest well enough.

 

[mustafur]

Assumption of Racism isn't Racism.

 

[huskeR32]

....assuming that everything else is equal. And that's a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you assume that one person has one disadvantage, and the other person is identical but doesn't have it, then voila, you've just ensured that your outcome is that one of them will have to work a bit harder.

I'm not assuming anything. I'm correcting a persistent misunderstanding of the term that gets argued against in this thread ad nauseam. If everyone else in this thread wants to keep on saying white privilege isn't a thing, fine by me. But at least start with a correct understanding of the term.

As for the rest of your post, I'm pretty clear on where you stand, and have no illusions that anything I have to say would ever change your mind. I just want people to argue against what the idea of white privilege actually says, not the made-up version they've decide to be personally insulted by.

---

I'll also never be the beneficiary of affirmative action either. That is an actual privilege.

So white privilege doesn't exist, but non-white privilege does?

Let's forget the fact that you are speaking in absolutes, your also speaking as if you know me or my story.

I'm not presuming to know anything about you other than what you yourself said in this thread. Your arguments always seem to center around the notion that because you're white and have faced hardship, then white privilege doesn't exist. And I'm just trying to point out that it's misguided to argue that. White privilege doesn't say that all white people get magical free success, or that no white people face adversity.

 

[Danoff]

I'm not assuming anything. I'm correcting a persistent misunderstanding of the term that gets argued against in this thread ad nauseam. If everyone else in this thread wants to keep on saying white privilege isn't a thing, fine by me. But at least start with a correct understanding of the term.

You should probably just embrace the sentiment that it's nonsense, rather than try to police the particular term being discussed. Nobody is saying that racism doesn't exist. So there's no need for "white privilege" as a term to exist or be understood.

 

[Exorcet]

Both of these realities can exist. You still worked hard for what you got; someone else facing an extra barrier or two along the way doesn't lessen that. Nobody is saying you're a lazy freeloader who had success just magically handed to you. These indignant responses you offer up are to an argument nobody is making.

I think part of the issue is that it's assumed a minority will have it harder. You even assumed this yourself with the hypothetical minority counterpart to @Rallywagon only being 90% as successful.

I can agree with minorities being more prone to facing racism, but I wouldn't assume that one of them will have a harder life by default.

 

[zzz_pt]

....assuming that everything else is equal. And that's a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you assume that one person has one disadvantage, and the other person is identical but doesn't have it, then voila, you've just ensured that your outcome is that one of them will have to work a bit harder.

In reality, there are so many disadvantages one might have that "white privilege" is meaningless. You could be beauty-privileged, or muscle-privileged, or height-privileged, or wealthy-parents-privileged, or protected-class-privileged, or smart-privileged, or likeable-priveleged, or intact-family privileged, or non-abused-child-privileged, or educated-parents-privileged, or health-privileged.

White-privilege isn't even always a privilege in all circumstances. There are plenty of examples where a non-white person has real tangible advantages over white people.

This is why people keep saying "I never received that privilege", because the term itself is meaningless. It's attempting to isolate something universal (disadvantage) and focus on it for only one group. It feels wrong to a lot of people because it is wrong.

I'd rather be black and have loving parents than white and not have them. I'd rather be black and beautiful than white and ugly. So what are we talking about?

/thread

The concept of white privilege is so myopic, I don't get why so many people get so attached to it.

 

[PocketZeven]

Assumption of Racism isn't Racism.

Denying racism is also not Racism, but it is ignorance. In my experience most racist fully know they are.

The concept of X privilege is difficult for people who arent a minority to understand. Albeit a white person in an asian or black community or a jew in a protestant/catholic community etc. The name of this thread is misleading and provoking, but that doesnt mean the concept doesnt exist.

 

[Danoff]

Denying racism is also not Racism, but it is ignorance.

Who is denying racism?

In my experience most racist fully know they are. The concept of X privilege is difficult for people who arent a minority to understand.

...and that's racist.

 

[PocketZeven]

Who is denying racism?



...and that's racist.

The people that arent aware that minorities have it more difficult.

What part of those statement is racist? Please explain your point of view? These 2 sentences where sperate statements. I edited them to avoid confusion.

 

[Danoff]

What part of those statement is racist? Please explain your point of view? These 2 sentences where sperate statements. I edited them to avoid confusion.

You basically just said "white people wouldn't understand". How hard is it to see the racist element of that? Just insert another color instead of white and read it again. Can I turn your statement around and say that the concept of non-white privilege is difficult for people who are of a minority to understand? No, that would be racist too.