Opinion Why are people angry at white privilege being real?

[NaughtyBoy]

Rod1, serious question: before being a famous boxer, would someone like Canelo Alvarez get favoritism in Mexico?

I mean he's white, but he's also a ginger.

He maybe got favoritism against him... Being a ginger type of guy in Mexico isn't quite normal.

 

[milkmandanl]

How was Trayvon Martin acting like a criminal? or the Indian grandpa?

Answer this question for me primera.

Do you believe that the 6 yr old autistic white child that was shot by 2 black cops while seated in a car seat in his fathers car was a victim of racism?

 

[kpt018]

I actually do think it is related to what I prefer to call advantages. Ok privilege. The science on IQ disparities has actually been a big bummer for me. Not that I am going to change my message on the matter of free will and personal responsibility, but it does make the message more problematic. Some would seek solutions in creating laws that enforce equality of outcome. Not me. That is fighting a losing battle. Competency will always trump attempts to mitigate the advantages it brings.

I don't think it should be a bummer. In one respect the science does prove out that we cannot make assumptions about individuals regardless of the results by race and other demographics because the numbers don't support that conclusion.

The conclusion that people are born with different ability does not lead to the conclusion that we need equality of outcomes and that isn't being argued by the left anyway (not the thinking left). We'd argue for equality of opportunity to the extent we can achieve that without too much of a burden to others.

I've used this example in the past. Many of us believe that a janitor's children should have the same opportunity for success as say a surgeon's kids and differences in their success is hopefully attributable to their ability and work ethic. We understand this can be taken too far in terms of policy and there are policies that would do more damage than good, but the goal is access to opportunities. We are not arguing the janitor should make what the surgeon makes (equal outcomes) because we acknowledge how valuable that surgeon is and their contributions to society. We also don't think the janitor and his children should go without eating dinner because he wasn't lucky enough to have been born with exceptional and marketable talents.

For me this is the foundation for supporting a social safety net, access to healthcare, access to good education, etc..

 

[USA!USA!]

No, people stereotype black males, because black males are overrepresented in crime.

Not reasonable to say that is why it happened without knowing that without a doubt. It's stereotyping the neighbors as black-fearing racists.

 

[Rod1]

Not reasonable to say that is why it happened without knowing that without a doubt. It's stereotyping the neighbors as black-fearing racists.

Nope, its more natural than you think.

If i see a cholo looking guy in a decent neighbourhood and 9 out of 10 times they are up to no good, im not taking any chance on the 1 out of 10 that is minding its own business

Im not saying that they are black-fearing racists, im saying that since blacks are overrepresented in crime then being black will make people think that a black guy in a non-black neighbourhood its up to no good.

The Indian grandpa had the bad luck because he looked younger than he was, he looked black.

 

[Soul Crusher]

What are people's thoughts on experiments that show black sounding names are about half as likely to get calls back with the exact same credentials?

http://www.nber.org/papers/w9873.pdf

And a piece done by Forbes (link to study within) that studied both black and Asian sounding names and came up with a similar result.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/hbswor...resumes-get-more-job-interviews/#ad0977f7b74e

Just two cities, Boston and Chicago.

"Weaknesses of the Experiment

We have already highlighted the strengths of this experiment relative to previous audit studies. We now discuss its weaknesses. First, our outcome measure is crude, even relative to the previous audit studies. Ultimately, one cares about whether an applicants gets the job and about the wage offered conditional on getting the job. Our procedure, however, simply measures callbacks for interviews. To the extent that the search process has even moderate frictions, one would expect that reduced interview rates would translate into reduced job offers. However, we are not able to translate our results into gaps in hiring rates or earnings.

Another weakness is that the resumes do not directly report race but instead suggest race through personal names. This leads to various sources of concern. First, while the names are chosen to make race salient, some employers may simply not notice the names or not recognize their racial content. As a result, our findings may under-estimate the extent of discrimination. Relatedly, because we are not assigning race but only race-specific name, our results are not representative of the average African American (who may not have such a racially distinct name).

Finally, and this is an issue pervasive in both our study and the pair-matching audit studies, newspaper ads represent only one channel for job search. As is well known from the existing literature, social networks are a common means through which people find jobs and one that clearly cannot be studied here. This omission would affect our results if African Americans use social networks more or if less discriminating employers rely more on networks"

I wouldn't use this as proof of white privilege.

You have to ask yourself why does "whitening" () your name give you a better chance? Multiculturalism that's being pushed today is something new. It's normal to try and fit in with the majority and their culture.

The sad part here is that people are so angry that they would rather just change the demographics and really mess up society with "social justice" and claim America has no culture or identity. The demographic changes that are happening are going to make things worse in my opinion.

Saying check your white privilege, you have no culture or identity, shut up and listen, you stole that land, diversity is strength, you're racist and what ever else I'm missing is not going to help in any shape way or form.

And like someone else already said, no one wants an angry minority or a snobby white person to stand over them (figuratively) after a hard day of work and be told they're privileged and that they should do something about it.

 

[kpt018]

Just two cities, Boston and Chicago.


I wouldn't use this as proof of white privilege.

You have to ask yourself why does "whitening" () your name give you a better chance? Multiculturalism that's being pushed today is something new. It's normal to try and fit in with the majority and their culture.

The sad part here is that people are so angry that they would rather just change the demographics and really mess up society with "social justice" and claim America has no culture or identity. The demographic changes that are happening are going to make things worse in my opinion.

Saying check your white privilege, you have no culture or identity, shut up and listen, you stole that land, diversity is strength, you're racist and what ever else I'm missing is not going to help in any shape way or form.

No one wants an angry minority or a snobby white person to stand over them (figuratively) after a hard day of work and be told they're privileged and that they should do something about it.

Similar studies have been done over and over yielding similar results. And I'm not claiming that proves WP anyway, it's just one piece of the puzzle.

 

[Soul Crusher]

Similar studies have been done over and over yielding similar results. And I'm not claiming that proves WP anyway, it's just one piece of the puzzle.

Did they have the same weaknesses as the study you posted? Piece to what puzzle?

Maybe we should be letting black people know that if they don't find a company that's owned by black people to work at, their name might reduce their chances at finding a job. Same goes for Asians.

 

[kpt018]

Did they have the same weaknesses as the study you posted? Piece to what puzzle?

Maybe we should be letting black people know that if they don't find a company that's owned by black people to work at that their name might reduce their chances at finding a job. Same goes for Asians.

Well both seem to be true, so yeah, why don't you go ahead and let them know.

 

[Soul Crusher]

Well both seem to be true, so yeah, why don't you go ahead and let them know.

What seems to be true?

I think it would be a good idea to let them know.

You're not implying that I might be savagely attacked now are you?

 

[kpt018]

What seems to be true?

I think it would be a good idea to let them know.

You're not implying that I might be savagely attacked now are you?

That having a cultural name gives you a disadvantage of landing that job vs those with white sounding names. It's repeated over and over.

And I have no fucking idea what you're referring to with the last question.

 

[Soul Crusher]

That having a cultural name gives you a disadvantage of landing that job vs those with white sounding names. It's repeated over and over.

And I have no fucking idea what you're referring to with the last question.

Excellent so white privilege doesn't exist. With that being said:

"why don't you go ahead and let them know."

This kind of sounds like you're saying I shouldn't. Would you let them know or would you tell them they should continue bitching about white people?

Seems like the right thing to do is give them warnings. They better hurry up too and get out of that rut.

 

[kpt018]

Excellent so white privilege doesn't exist. With that being said:

"why don't you go ahead and let them know."

This kind of sounds like you're saying I shouldn't. Would you let them know or would you tell them they should continue bitching about white people?

Seems like the right thing to do is give them warnings. They better hurry up too and get out of that rut.

Bad conclusion. The rest is ranting.

 

[Soul Crusher]

Bad conclusion. The rest is ranting.

Believers of white privilege...

 

[The ScorpioN]

The neighbours called about a suspicious black man walking on the street, without he neighbours assuming the indian man is black and thus calling the police he wouldnt had been slammed.

Not sure if srs.

There are countless examples of whites getting ragdolled by cops.

Watch old seasons of the show Cops, you'll see some Khabib smeshing on rednecks.

 

[mixcontactsport]

No, your inference is not evidence enough.



That's how I felt when I read your evidence too.



Maybe when you have something more than inference.



How old are you?

I said the evidence of absence in the American Media and society, is proof that there's a preference for White people. You're not even an open-minded person. You're a liar.

Not for leftists. Leftism by its very nature crushes dissent. Freedom of thought is anathema to leftism. Do not be angry at him, he is simply doing what is in his nature.

this is proof that you're a hypocrite. You don't know what you're talking about, so you're a liar and a hypocrite. I'm done with you. Keep living in denial.

 

[PEDS Help me Post]

 

[Starman]

I said the evidence of absence in the American Media and society, is proof that there's a preference for White people.

The percentage of whites vs non-whites in the media is correlation, not causation. You are going to have to eventually understand the difference between the two if you are serious about convincing people.

How many white people are in Chinese cinema? Your failure to understand what a majority is, or how majorities play a role in correlating data when it comes to "representation", is precisely the problem you and those on your side are afflicted with. You simply do not understand basic concepts or how they do (and not) relate to each other.

You're not even an open-minded person. You're a liar.

What have I lied about? Correlation is not causation. Step getting angry and emotional, and start being logical.

this is proof that you're a hypocrite.

Why are you getting angry when I say freedom of thought is anathema to the Left? I thought you said you weren't a leftist. Why would you get angry about this, and how in the world do you think making such a statement makes me a hypocrite?

You don't know what you're talking about, so you're a liar and a hypocrite. I'm done with you. Keep living in denial.

I'm not denying anything. I'm asking you for evidence to support your claim. Thus far your only evidence of white privilege is that there are more white people on TV than non-whites. Do you understand how majorities work or not? What you are citing is not evidence of white privilege, but evidence that whites are the majority.

 

[Starman]

This itself is a fallacy. A logical fallacy only applies (duh) to logical arguments.

Well if it isn't Hack Savage, providing another nonsensical answer to a question nobody asked.

So if someone says, "experts say X; therefore, logically, X must be true," that is a fallacy. If someone says, "experts say X; therefore X is probably true," that's not only not a fallacy, it's not even a controversial statement.

No one here, and certainly no one I was talking to, said white privilege or its proponents were *probably* right, so you can stop tilting at that particular windmill right now.

What was said was that no one here had a right to question the research being done by *experts* because they weren't *experts* themselves. Try to keep your responses in context in the future, and keep your intellectual dishonesty to a minimum. It will actually help your arguments.

This is so silly and so obviously at odds with reality that one wonders if the writer of it has ever left his house.

How many leftwing governments have banned freedom of speech, which is the natural progression of freedom of thought? To say that freedom of thought is anathema to leftism is not only true, it is obvious. It's not the Right pushing for censorship of opposing ideas through the guise of "cracking down on hate speech", or demanding that other forms of speech (criticism of the global cooling/global warming/climate change agenda) be banned altogether.

Who can blame you for trying to shun that label, though? You're just as deranged and dishonest as everyone else on the Left.

 

[Mark Cutting]

The percentage of whites vs non-whites in the media is correlation, not causation. You are going to have to eventually understand the difference between the two if you are serious about convincing people.

How many white people are in Chinese cinema? Your failure to understand what a majority is, or how majorities play a role in correlating data when it comes to "representation", is precisely the problem you and those on your side are afflicted with. You simply do not understand basic concepts or how they do (and not) relate to each other.



What have I lied about? Correlation is not causation. Step getting angry and emotional, and start being logical.



Why are you getting angry when I say freedom of thought is anathema to the Left? I thought you said you weren't a leftist. Why would you get angry about this, and how in the world do you think making such a statement makes me a hypocrite?



I'm not denying anything. I'm asking you for evidence to support your claim. Thus far your only evidence of white privilege is that there are more white people on TV than non-whites. Do you understand how majorities work or not? What you are citing is not evidence of white privilege, but evidence that whites are the majority.

I'm shocked they've yet to mention "whitening" strips for your teeth.