Racism and privilege

[Stoked]

If you have ever posted that you accept you have your own racist tendencies, and that you need to change your own behavior, I missed it. If you tell me that you so posted, I will happily take your word for it and apologize for indicating otherwise.

I love that to you I have to be racist or have racist tendencies. It is beyond doubt. There is no possible way that I could have denied accepting racist tendencies as I deny your assertion that we are all racist.

No. Possible. Way. No way that I can be truly comfortable in a room full of people of a different skin color, no way that I could not care less about a skin tone and that it has no bearing on how I view a person, no way that I have any exposure to anything but a world full of white people. No way that I see that we as a society have failed our youth and in particular our non white youth in a massively tragic way. That we are handicapping them by denying them the right that they have to all be on an equal level with education and opportunity.

Nope. I am white and by default I must have guilt for things I did not do. That I am guilty by no other virtue then my skin tone. No way that I am teaching my own children, including nieces and nephews, that there is no difference between then and a child of a different skin tone.

So I ask you, who truly needs to change their behavior?

 

[moevillini]

personally, I've long been partial to the café mocha type of guy, here's one of my faves...
unfortunately, he's married - - plus he's too young for me
(I'm not the cougar type...)

but oh, my heart melts for Thabo

 

[moevillini]

...I'll use the "Like this post" feature occasionally, though, and I think that was a fine addition to the board. I don't expect anyone else to chime in with "me too"s to my posts, either. My ideas should stand or fall on the merit of the evidence that can be brought for them, or perhaps on internal merit, but not because people like them or do not like them...

ironic, though, because the entire basis of the argument in this thread is that the idea of racial privilege is based NOT on evidence but solely on one's emotional reaction to skin tone and how that is shaped by their culture (ie, relative "likes" by others in the culture)


just thought i'd throw that in, FWIW

it's a conundrum if you ask me


(or should I say....)
n/m

 

[One Brow]

I love that to you I have to be racist or have racist tendencies. It is beyond doubt. There is no possible way that I could have denied accepting racist tendencies as I deny your assertion that we are all racist.

Which is why I was quite comfortable with my claim.

No. Possible. Way. No way that I can be truly comfortable in a room full of people of a different skin color,

You can be racist and still be truly comfortable in a room full of people of a different skin color.

no way that I could not care less about a skin tone and that it has no bearing on how I view a person,

You can be racist and still not consciously care less about a skin tone and that it has no conscious bearing on how you view a person,

no way that I have any exposure to anything but a world full of white people.

You can be racist and still have any exposure to a world full of people of a variety of perceived races.

No way that I see that we as a society have failed our youth and in particular our non white youth in a massively tragic way.

You can be racist and still see that we as a society have failed our youth and in particular our non white youth in a massively tragic way.

That we are handicapping them by denying them the right that they have to all be on an equal level with education and opportunity.

You can be racist and still see that we are handicapping them by denying them the right that they have to all be on an equal level with education and opportunity.

Nope. I am white and by default I must have guilt for things I did not do.

If feeling guilty can help you change you behaviors, fine, otherwise it's useless.

That I am guilty by no other virtue then my skin tone. No way that I am teaching my own children, including nieces and nephews, that there is no difference between then and a child of a different skin tone.

You can be racist and still be teaching my own children, including nieces and nephews, that there is no difference between then and a child of a different skin tone.

So I ask you, who truly needs to change their behavior?

All of us.

 

[One Brow]

ironic, though, because the entire basis of the argument in this thread is that the idea of racial privilege is based NOT on evidence but solely on one's emotional reaction to skin tone and how that is shaped by their culture (ie, relative "likes" by others in the culture)

I may have misunderstood your point. There are reams of studies on the existence and effects of racial privilege. The cause is emotional, but that doesn't make it less real.

 

[Stoked]

Which is why I was quite comfortable with my claim.

You can be racist and still be truly comfortable in a room full of people of a different skin color.

You can be racist and still not consciously care less about a skin tone and that it has no conscious bearing on how you view a person,

You can be racist and still have any exposure to a world full of people of a variety of perceived races.

You can be racist and still see that we as a society have failed our youth and in particular our non white youth in a massively tragic way.

You can be racist and still see that we are handicapping them by denying them the right that they have to all be on an equal level with education and opportunity.

If feeling guilty can help you change you behaviors, fine, otherwise it's useless.

You can be racist and still be teaching my own children, including nieces and nephews, that there is no difference between then and a child of a different skin tone.

All of us.

Glad you are secure in your assumption about soemone you know nothing about.

Thank you for supporting my interpretation that your stance is that no matter what I do I am a racist. Cling to that belief if it makes you feel better. I wont.

 

[One Brow]

Glad you are secure in your assumption about soemone you know nothing about.

I am very secure in the knowledge that you are a human, that your brain works like a human brain, and that you have spent much of your like in the US.

Thank you for supporting my interpretation that your stance is that no matter what I do I am a racist. Cling to that belief if it makes you feel better. I wont.

You don't believe you are a human?

 

[Stoked]

I am very secure in the knowledge that you are a human, that your brain works like a human brain, and that you have spent much of your like in the US.



You don't believe you are a human?

Nice attempt to equate the word human with the word racist.

Grab on with both hands and never let go. I have discussed, at great length, this subject with you and after it all I see you making the same points, no matter how wrong they are, over and over while pointedly ignoring those asking you for what your next step would be.

You have no answer beyond "you're a racist".

 

[One Brow]

Nice attempt to equate the word human with the word racist.

We are what we are.

Grab on with both hands and never let go. I have discussed, at great length, this subject with you and after it all I see you making the same points, no matter how wrong they are, over and over while pointedly ignoring those asking you for what your next step would be.

You have no answer beyond "you're a racist".

You'll understand if I don't take your determination of the correctness of my points as being persuasive, particularly since I'm trying to continually improve my interpretation the results of the evidence and expertise, while you are determined to stay in the same mindset.

I don't believe in offering fictional answers to complex issues.

 

[Deleted member 848]

I would agree that your perception here is correct; it comes close to my own perception. I suppose I rely too much on the notion of "silence means assent or apathy". When someone make an interesting point I agree with, and I'm not already in the middle of a discussion/debate/argument/what-have-you, I'm little inclined to post a "me too". I'll use the "Like this post" feature occasionally, though, and I think that was a fine addition to the board. I don't expect anyone else to chime in with "me too"s to my posts, either. My ideas should stand or fall on the merit of the evidence that can be brought for them, or perhaps on internal merit, but not because people like them or do not like them.

That's all fair. I have also noticed that you tend to chip in on Utah Jazz-related threads in a non-argumentative manner, which is also good to see. Unprompted, self-inspired input is always interesting to read-- particularly in the Jazz forum. Keep it up. It's hard for many to take anyone's posts seriously when the majority of his/her library of posts, are accusational in nature

One of the implied messages in some posts is "Just shut up". I don't sense that in your post, but it can present itself as a comment on posting style or personality in other posts.

Well of course there is an inherent nature (in my opinion) to want to silence those whose opinions differ from our own. However, I think your delivery is definitely on the more provocative side of the spectrum (which I believe is intentional)-- which makes some sense, as some believe that provocation is the best way to really get someone to re-consider an issue that they've made up their mind on.

Here, you mention that you were attempting to offer information that could possibly alter LogGrad's actions whenever he happens to hire a person next.


In my opinion, your posts are too provocative. Instead of bringing fellow posters, and endearing them towards your opinions-- a lot of times your delivery will be counter-productive, and merely push people away.


As a suggestion for you, if you are finding it difficult to have peers be able to really take what you say to heart, perhaps a delivery adjustment is a thing that you should consider.

I will consider what you are saying as true-- and feel obliged to offer some of my own $0.02 to someone with noble considerations in mind.

 

[One Brow]

Well of course there is an inherent nature (in my opinion) to want to silence those whose opinions differ from our own. However, I think your delivery is definitely on the more provocative side of the spectrum (which I believe is intentional)-- which makes some sense, as some believe that provocation is the best way to really get someone to re-consider an issue that they've made up their mind on.

Here, you mention that you were attempting to offer information that could possibly alter LogGrad's actions whenever he happens to hire a person next.


In my opinion, your posts are too provocative. Instead of bringing fellow posters, and endearing them towards your opinions-- a lot of times your delivery will be counter-productive, and merely push people away.

You have to choose a style to match a goal and a topic. Privilege has a blinding effect. No one likes to think they had the easy road; they remember their struggles, but don't see how much more difficult their struggles could have been. It even operates on different axes; such as white women seeing how being a woman disadvantages them, but not seeing how being white offers them a measure of privilege; the reverse is true for black men. If you are talking about tax policy, a softer, more intellectual approach is probably more effective. By contrast, on issues of privilege, most people, in particular white men, say they never really appreciated its reality until their eyes were opened by the anger and hurt others felt.

Even in this thread, VinylOne basically threw them a bone with saying that "some minorities that function as constant victims in this world", allowing people who don't want to accept privilege let themselves off the hook. I mean, I know some white men who function as constant victims in this world; no one seems to think that has a bearing on the culture of racism. However, once you acknowledge that there are also minorities who do this, it becomes an excuse not to work on the problem, and VinylOne becomes the reasonable guy by offering them this out (I'm not saying this was VinylOne's intent, just the effect).

 

[Deleted member 848]

You have to choose a style to match a goal and a topic. Privilege has a blinding effect. No one likes to think they had the easy road; they remember their struggles, but don't see how much more difficult their struggles could have been.

This is pure postulation on your behalf-- in fact, I have read literature that proposes the opposite. Do you have any justification behind a claim like this?

It even operates on different axes; such as white women seeing how being a woman disadvantages them, but not seeing how being white offers them a measure of privilege; the reverse is true for black men. If you are talking about tax policy, a softer, more intellectual approach is probably more effective. By contrast, on issues of privilege, most people, in particular white men, say they never really appreciated its reality until their eyes were opened by the anger and hurt others felt.

How were their "eyes opened"? Was it through condescending, accusational "you're wrong I'm right" conversations? Or was it through a softer, more intellectual approach?

I have spent years debunking myths about certain tenets of myself-- my faith particularly. Even here on Jazzfanz. From personal observation, having a soft, mutually-respectful conversation tends to be the most eye-opening for the recipient.

Even in this thread, VinylOne basically threw them a bone with saying that "some minorities that function as constant victims in this world", allowing people who don't want to accept privilege let themselves off the hook. I mean, I know some white men who function as constant victims in this world; no one seems to think that has a bearing on the culture of racism. However, once you acknowledge that there are also minorities who do this, it becomes an excuse not to work on the problem, and VinylOne becomes the reasonable guy by offering them this out (I'm not saying this was VinylOne's intent, just the effect).

This point makes sense, but it's a big leap in logic. When talking about things more softly, you are not doing the issue
a disservice. I think that might be the disconnect you seem to be exhibiting-- you feel that the only way you can give this issue proper attention, and get people to think about what they're condoning, is by this aggressive approach of yours. I, along with many others, would disagree.