Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I thought Americorps was federal. Am I wrong?

 Manchu wrote:
What's the problem? Are you saying white privilege doesn't exist or that white people should not think critically about it or that critical thought generally is bad or ... ?

My father grew up so poor he and his brother were put in an orphanage just to eat. They picked cotton at 6 years old. Later, his brother ran away to join the Corps, and a judge offered him that opportunity when he was 16.

What was that white privilege thing again?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Medium of Death wrote:
Manchu beat me, and said it more eloquently than I would have.

As for the "unlearn" part, I took that in the context of pre/misconceptions and bias.

Comparing the White wristband to the Yellow star worn by Jews is pretty ridiculous... even done from a "humourous" stand. Considering one has the concept of Privilege/responsibility while the other was supposed to Foster hatred and shame.

If it were a government agency then there's a joyous argument it violates the Constitution on its face.
Do Asians wear yellow bands? Do Taiwanese have to wear them but Montagnards or filipinos don't?
Do African Americans wear different colors to express their privilege as being "house" vs. "field"?
Same to same for "white" hispanics vs. the sons of Mayans?
Do North Koreans have to wear one that says "at least I don't have to eat grass"
So South Africans have to wear one that says "ask me about my accent!"
Do Comanches get to wear Tshirts that say "see this is what happens when you don't have good border security?" Ok I'd down with that one.

 Mr. Burning wrote:

• Wear a white wristband as a reminder about your privilege, and as a personal commitment to explain why you wear the wristband.

Does the white wristband not look out of place next to some of the more upmarket and fashionable timepieces that whitey can obtain?

Can I wear a crimson wristband, and when someone asks shout "BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD!"

 Mr. Burning wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Mr. Burning wrote:

• Wear a white wristband as a reminder about your privilege, and as a personal commitment to explain why you wear the wristband.

Does the white wristband not look out of place next to some of the more upmarket and fashionable timepieces that whitey can obtain?

Can I wear a crimson wristband, and when someone asks shout "BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD!"

You should shout that regardless of useless wristbands.

You're assuming I don't.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Again does that mean that "white" hispanics should wear a bracelet too? How about 1950s Cuban emigres vs. Mariel boatlift people?
Do Taiwainese and Chinese have to wear a bracelet but non Chinese Malaysians don't?
Do "White Europeans" have to wear them but Irish Americans don't? Do Eastern Europeans have to wear them, even though they were uniformly poor? If not can we get a listing of countries that are acceptable and those representing the oppressor list?
How about half "white" and half Asian? Do they wear a half bracelet?
Same to same for light skinned African Americans.

This is getting fun.

 Manchu wrote:

 CuddlySquig wrote:
white people will feel like people are asking them to feel ashamed of who they are

Well, the wristband is supposed to make them keep in mind how lucky they are to be white. So if anything, the opposite concern is more relevant.

Interesting that no one has replied to my queries yet. If a person is half "white" do they have to wear one too? Does President Obama have to wear one?

 CuddlySquig wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Manchu wrote:

 CuddlySquig wrote:
white people will feel like people are asking them to feel ashamed of who they are

Well, the wristband is supposed to make them keep in mind how lucky they are to be white. So if anything, the opposite concern is more relevant.

Interesting that no one has replied to my queries yet. If a person is half "white" do they have to wear one too? Does President Obama have to wear one?

As a half-white I'd only wear it if it made me eligible for something good. Otherwise I'd go "hell no."

So it is a badge of discrimination then...

So if some chick comes in with this its good, but if she wears a white power Tshirt is that good too?

 Manchu wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
If a person is half "white"

I don't think this is primarily a question genealogy.

So what is it then?

So women have been oppressed in the past. I know this because my wife tells me this, and as she is holding a large skillet, I am sure she is correct. But if she's white does she wear one?

What if someone is white, but just arrived in this country?

What is someone is black, but have white skin?

What if someone is white, but were raised by black people?

What if someone were neanderthal but was raised by proto wiener dogs? Er...you didn't read that. look over there!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:

 CuddlySquig wrote:
If you read the comments in some postings of this story, people are outraged because the message they get is "you are white therefore you are automatically successful and don't have to work for what you have. Lucky you."

No, the message is being white is an advantage in the United States. White people can certainly face other disadvantages, such as poverty, but race will never really be one of them.

Live in ing East L.A. and say that pinche gringo.

 Alfndrate wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:


Yes whites are privileged, we've conned our way into ruling over people for a few hundred years (all the years?), and because of it, we're kind of trying to make it up to EVERYONE by reminding ourselves of people who aren't us that did terrible things in the past.

If by Conned you mean Conquored, yeah.

I think things would be best if we stopped treating Race as if it was an issue. There is only 1 race, human. When people stop putting labels on each other based on the color of their skin, thats when there will be true equality on this subject.



As for the OP, well we have Black History month. If we insist on having this time of celebration for a portion of society can we have a White History month? And an Asian History month, and a Hispanic History month, and a Native American History month...

Well yes, it depended on who or what we were conquering lol. Some peoples didn't have the same concepts of ownership, rule, etc... as White Europeans did...

As Eddie Izzard says, "you can't have that, you haven't got a flag." when talking about British Imperialism...

Technically my people didn't conquer anything, unless you count the French and German parts, which conquered each other so er is that win win or lose lose?

 Albatross wrote:
Frazzled, have you ever heard of the phrase 'I'm not even going to dignify that with a response'?

I'd start from there.

Because you can't can you.

Obama is half "white." Should he wear one?
White hispanics were typiocally privileged over darker skinned hispanics. Should they wear one?
White Irish dealt with such fun as "no dogs or Irish permitted" Should they wear one?
Cajuns were oppressed by the British, then the Americans. Their language and culture were supressed. Should they wear one? (if it aint gator hide, their not going to wear it)
Cuban emigres in the 50s were typically extremely wealthy. Should they have to wear one?
While we're at it, define white? define black? Is someone from with a Vietnamese mother and Irish father white? What if the father is from Egypt?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LordofHats wrote:

 dogma wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
I would challange that.

A white person doesn't have access to as many scholarships as a black person of the same economic class.

Thats an instance where Race is a disadvantage/advantage depending on what it is.

What scholarships are limited to black people?

No where near near as many as Ivy League Legacies?

I didn't get those.

 Alfndrate wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
I refuse to take responsibility for what some ancestor of mine did or might have done, I only take responsibility for what I do.

I agree, this is the main reason why I think these wristbands are stupid. You're guilting people into feeling bad for things their ancestors did.

On the positive anyone who puts one on should feel bad. They should feel bad not because they're "white" but because their parents made a stupid baby.

When is it appropriate to just shout out "shut up and get a job you lazy hippies!" ?

 Grey Templar wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

Frazzled wrote:When is it appropriate to just shout out "shut up and get a job you lazy hippies!" ?

All the time; immediately after determining that they are, in fact, hippies.

We could replace hippies with bums to make it acceptable in any situation.

This is true.

 Manchu wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
I refuse to take responsibility for what some ancestor of mine did or might have done, I only take responsibility for what I do.

White privilege is not about feeling guilty over slavery. It's about the fact that being white in America TODAY is an advantage.

So what advantage is that again?

 Manchu wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
When is it appropriate to just shout out "shut up and get a job you lazy hippies!" ?

When you are alone in your nursing home room with the Fox News cranked up so high even your deaf neighbor can hear it.

Too late Manchu, you are far too late.

 Grey Templar wrote:
All hippies are bums but not all bums are hippies

You're good. You're real good. I think we have an addition to the Cedar Park AntiZombie and Hippy Brigade.

 azazel the cat wrote:

Alfndrate wrote:I know, but nothing I've gotten in life has been related to race, everything has been due to my own hard work or lack thereof.

But has anything been denied to you as a result? Because I suspect that, even objectively observed, many black folks could honestly claim that's an experience they've had.

My crazy ex finace's father would not be on the same block as me because I wasn't Mexican. He would see my car parked there, turnaround and drive away. Sometimes he would just park a few blocks down.

When I was in LA we would be rousted all the time but Da Manz. They weren't biased. They didn't like anybody in the neighborhood.

If you want a job in construction or most of the trades in Texas, and aren't the owner, good luck if you're not hispanic. Black, white, asian, its irrelevant.

 Grey Templar wrote:
So having a good family life is white priviledge?

Thats equvilant to saying that if you arn't white your family life sucks.

There are plenty of white families, more than there are of other colors, that have drug problems, abusive parents, divorce, etc...

Most unmarried teen pregnancies are to whites in the USA. Hispanic is catching up, unfortunately.

 Manchu wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
People being donkey-caves doesn't explain how so many indicators of prosperity are divided along racial lines.

And while that may be true... RACE isn't always the factor.

So you mean the existence of massive wealth and income gaps between whites and blacks, the differences in criminal prosecution, the differences in family life and education all of this is some kind of coincidence?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grey Templar wrote:
If I was white and in the same situation you'd probably just say suck it up.

No, I wouldn't say that.

Take out the wealthiest 4% and whats the wealth rates? You're really saying "rich people and white people."

 Grey Templar wrote:
Ok, take this situation.


If you have 100 equally qualified candiates for 10 positions.

10 of the candidates are of a minority.

How do you pick the candidates for the positions?


The proper way to pick is to put all their names in a hat and randomly pick 10 of them. No subjective measures. You don't pick 9 of the majority and 1 of the minority, that simply reinforces the racial segragation. Except the segragation is present at all levels, not between top and bottom.

Open bidding? And by open bidding I mean I mean, how fat is that envelope I am going to get?

 azazel the cat wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Ok, take this situation.


If you have 100 equally qualified candiates for 10 positions.

10 of the candidates are of a minority.

How do you pick the candidates for the positions?


The proper way to pick is to put all their names in a hat and randomly pick 10 of them. No subjective measures. You don't pick 9 of the majority and 1 of the minority, that simply reinforces the racial segragation. Except the segragation is present at all levels, not between top and bottom.

Open bidding? And by open bidding I mean I mean, how fat is that envelope I am going to get?

Which would imply that the wealthiest will get the positions; which currently means "non minorities", statistically speaking.

No it just means who gives the most bank. Everything else is a supposition on your part. Thats not racism. Thats free enterprise.

 Manchu wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:
I dislike dismissing entirely plausible ideas out of hand simply for the sake of a unified front

The trouble is, I didn't dismiss any idea at all, except the idea that there is no effective racism in the US. I listed several categories of disparate circumstances along racial lines and asked if the racial nature of the disparities was a coincidence. Your counterpoint (?) raised for the first time how in a specific sense these various indicators might be interelated. But at this point in the discussion, that is not really germane because we have people like whembly and Gray Templar flat out rejecting that there are any racial disparities in the first place.

There's lots of racism. Thats separate from "white privilege."

 Polonius wrote:
I still haven't gotten an answer to my question, which is that if there isn't white privilege, are we just going say that white people are smarter and harder working than black people?

@ Alf: yes, your advantage is that things would be even worse if you weren't white. Things that are likely to happen to white kids (two parents, stable housing, decent schools) are unlikley for black kids.

And white kids don't have to deal with the peer pressure of a black street culture that often ridicules academic success. Now, nobody thinks the nerds are cool in white communities, but being academically oriented isn't seen as "selling out." And the first person that wants to dismiss negative peer pressure as a consideration needs to get a clue.

Now put up the statistics for hispanics vs. blacks.
Third generation hispanics vs. 3rd generation black (of course define which hispanics)
Asians vs. blacks (that itself is racists as there are so many subgroups)
This is too easy a statisical advantage. If it were "white power" then all groups would be equally disadvantaged at all times.

 Hulksmash wrote:
So hispanics by the two examples provided are just as poor as african americans and get incarcerated less (even more so once you only include actual citizens) and asians aren't worth mentioning.

Interesting. I'd be more inclined to believe in a universal white priviledge if solid studies were done correlating wealth/race/incarceration rates/and geographical locations but including all races and similar crimes for incarceration. Not primarily focusing on blacka nd white. As it stands this argument seems more about blacks being under privledged than whites being over priviledged.

Amazing how asian americans almost never get dragged into their conversations as well. Can't have a minority that is pretty solidly middle class and doesn't have high incarceration rates mucking up the rankings I suppose.

It depends on the subsegment as well. Some Asian nationalities have done very well. Others not so much.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Polonius wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Being aware of white privilege only nurtures existing segregation to the extent that white people also claim to deserve the privilege or otherwise act to preserve it. But just saying, this is a racist society and I benefit from that racism -- that isn't creating or widening segregation. That's the first step, as a white person, on the road to opposing segregation.

I work in an office that's roughly 40% black. The thing is, the staff is mostly black, half of the leads are black, but of 15 judges, 14 lawyers, and five managers, only one person is black. Of course, the contract janitors are all black. Now, I know the immediate reason: not a lot of black people in Cleveland go to law school. But why is that true? Why does a federal office with no overt racism that I've encountered have a TO that resembles the 1950s?

You only recruit from Ivy League schools?

 Manchu wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
I work in an office that's roughly 40% black. The thing is, the staff is mostly black, half of the leads are black, but of 15 judges, 14 lawyers, and five managers, only one person is black. Of course, the contract janitors are all black. Now, I know the immediate reason: not a lot of black people in Cleveland go to law school. But why is that true? Why does a federal office with no overt racism that I've encountered have a TO that resembles the 1950s?

Same at my firm. Two black people work in my office. One is a secretary and the other is a secretary recently promoted to paralegal. Nine attorneys work in my office and we're all white and all but one is male.

Where do you recruit from? Where you recruit from defines who you hire.

 Manchu wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
I work in an office that's roughly 40% black. The thing is, the staff is mostly black, half of the leads are black, but of 15 judges, 14 lawyers, and five managers, only one person is black. Of course, the contract janitors are all black. Now, I know the immediate reason: not a lot of black people in Cleveland go to law school. But why is that true? Why does a federal office with no overt racism that I've encountered have a TO that resembles the 1950s?

Same at my firm. Two black people work in my office. One is a secretary and the other is a secretary recently promoted to paralegal. Nine attorneys work in my office and we're all white and all but one is male.

maybe you should hire people from TSU.

 Polonius wrote:

 daedalus wrote:

The two Chinese women, the black guy, one of the white guys, and the white woman are all promoted to a higher level (better paid) than the others, with myself being the effectively the highest level technical person on the floor.

My anecdotes do not match well with your anecdotes. Yes, I suppose there are more white guys than any other single race. Is that unreasonable? Given that St. Louis population demographics of 2011 show St. Louis as being 76% white, I would say, assuming equal capability throughout race, it is not unreasonable.

I'm going to say what most people are too polite to say: it's possible that the people promoted were promoted on merit. Which is, I'm sure, the same way our offices were staffed.

the question becomes, why does the talent pool look the way it does?

My office is full of dern fereners, like half of them. Dern fereners, taking our JOBS!*


*Frazzled works for an evil dern ferener bank. Hurray!

Wait now you're saying hearing is a privilege? Ok, you've just defined "privilege" into meaninglessness.

Is there is racism? You betcha your ass there is. But its not just "whites" against "blacks." Thats a lazy philosophy.

 Manchu wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Wait now you're saying hearing is a privilege.

I really wish I could tell when you are being serious and when you are just substituting thread derailment for the arguments that you either cannot or will not make. Because I am really tired of always assuming that you are acting in good faith without any evidence that you are actually doing so. But to continue the trend ...

No, I am not saying hearing is a privilege. I am saying that being able to hear is a privileged status.

Being able to hear is a privileged status? Thats er..normal for humans. You're making defineitly using any any advantage one person has over another as privileged, I guess to be addressed.
How about eyesight? How about height? Width? length of people's left pinky. What about those people with six fingers? Are they disadvantaged or privileged?
On the positive under the Manchu doctrine I can now allege discrimination. Excellent! I deserve half your stuff Manchu because you're more privileged than me. Plus you can probably type. A further privilege! I should get 3/4 of your stuff.

Can you pack that up? My birthday's coming up and I need a new pair of everything, pronto!

 daedalus wrote:
@Frazz: Actually, lefties appear to earn more money than right-handed folk.
http://www.slate.com/articles/business/the_dismal_science/2006/08/sinister_and_rich.html

I can't wait until we tackle this left-handed privilege issue.

Lefties are so sinister.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
I like to pretend that racism doesn't exist anymore and white privilege isn't a thing. But then I go out in public with my wife and face reality. It's anecdotal, I know. But the amount of racist bullcrap I get to hear on a daily basis is just mind numbing. I quit one of the most rewarding activities I have ever done because of it, and it's a pretty sore spot for me.

Sorry dude...

So all the white folk can drum on complaining about political correctness run amok and how this is all made up stuff. But I will just lump all the "white privilege is BS" people in with the "men are discriminated against" crowd. Sorry if that offends anyone. They can deal with it the same way I deal with the hateful looks I get when this white guy holds hands with his black wife.

I'm not saying racism doesn't exists... of course it does, and I do feel bad that this happens to you and your wife.

One of my very good friend is black and is married to my ex's white sister. They see this too.

But wearing a braclet/put up postit notes/whatever "reminding" you that white privilege exists? That's just a but much.

Oh ye, there's lots of racism. I never said there wasn't, sadly.
But here's a positive. I see even less of it in my kid's generation. You have to have hope and keep pushing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:

 whembly wrote:
And in this case, what I'm saying is that these sorts of mental jujitsu doesn't help the cause.

It's not mental jiujitsu just because it's (apparently) hard for you to understand. It is a real difference. Our society is designed for people who can hear. Watch a person lose his hearing suddenly (currently happening with my father in law) and it will become obvious. Or see how an older person who was born deaf or became deaf early on in life (my grandmother) has in fact been treated as stupid and how that has in fact affected her throughout her whole life.

 whembly wrote:
Just realize that I'm fething deaf and I don't need/deserve any special treatment. I understand that I'll have difficulties compared to others who can hear, but I'll adapt and overcome.

How exactly are you going to adapt? Learn to read lips -- great, now what about telephone conversations? A relay system -- ah but that's not you adapting. It's not all boot straps. We're human beings and we live in human communities. Those communities need to account for all of their members.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Can we introduce social darwinism to this festering pile of gak?

Social darwinist ideology + racist ideology ... someone is trying to Godwin-bomb the thread.

Strangely my wife's BFF comes from a deaf family, married to a deaf guy, with an adopted deaf girl. They do pretty good. He's fortunate in that he doesn't hear the ruckus his his nonhearing impaired kids make. His response to your argument, when I put similar to him, is strictly "whatever, deal."

 DiAF wrote:
I think a better idea for the wrist band would be one that everyone wears. It would be transparent, and have the word "human" written on it. To help remind us that regardless of our skin colour we're all human, and should all treat each other with respect and care.

Ooh I like that.