Man Wears “Caucasians” Shirt to Illustrate White Privilege

[drstrangelov]

The claim he is trying to make requires some kind of proof, other than his pinky swear that it happened, in order to properly engage with it. It doesn't help that his experiment doesn't even make sense, and he's clearly coming from a position of bias.

The report is only as credible as the source. "Some guy who says so", with no other form of proof(seriously, why wouldn't he document this on video?) isn't that credible of a source.

It's not some scientific study, he's reporting brief interactions he had with people on the street. Do you just assume everyone you talk to is making up everything they say whole cloth if they didn't capture evidence? It's not like he's making some outlandish claims, you just don't like the implication so it's easier to just deny or deflect. Your level of discomfort here only illustrates how triggered thin-skinned white people are about this.

 

[jamel]

Gotdamn...

Yall realize this mother fucker could have worn a Slayer shirt and achieved the same result, right?

Someone would have checked him.

 

[n...not crazy]

Scientific.

Do you have anything that speaks to the contrary?

 

[HereticBD]

It's not some scientific study, he's reporting brief interactions he had with people on the street.

Why wouldn't he document it on video? Seems like if you wanted to prove this with an experiment of this kind, irrefutable video documentation of it actually happening would be a key part of the experiment, because you will automatically be met with skepticism.

Do you just assume everyone you talk to is making up everything they say whole cloth if they didn't capture evidence? It's not like he's making some outlandish claims, you just don't like the implication so it's easier to just deny or deflect. Your level of discomfort here only illustrates how triggered thin-skinned white people are about this.

You're the triggered one here, bud. You can't stand it that this guy's credibility is being called into question, and are lashing out at anyone who dare suggests he's full of shit.

I have a feeling your generous lending of credibility, would be far different if this was some random white guy claiming he was harassed by Muslims on the street, for not having his wife covered up.

 

[spamking]

Where you miss the mark is that its not necessarily 'personal'.

How in the world is an individual defining what they find offensive missing the mark?

Redskin was the name the british used for the scalps of natives when paying bounties.

So?

I get some people will argue that n***** is okay and only racist due to twisting for personal values, but it does not make it right.

There are historical racist shit, and redskin appears to be one of them.

There are many, many terms that someone can argue is divisive, racist, etc. . . . doesn't actually make those terms any of those.

So in your personal opinion you believe redskin appears to be a historically racist term because the British used it to describe the type of scalps they'd pay a bounty for?

 

[sangreporsangre]

Im not going to accuse the guy of fabricating the whole story based upon the rationale provided. The blanket denial or deflection tells me that this topic generates response, which validates his premise. I don't hold people to arbitrary standards for trust. Theres no inherent requirement for video evidence for me to believe such simple interactions took place. That's just a standard you're using comfort yourself after deciding you'd rather not engage with ideas that upset you.

The logic that you're using is beyond twisted. The fact that people are doubting the word of a guy who has every reason to lie (including a financial stake) and offers no proof (despite it being EXTREMELY easy to provide such in 2018) validates his premise, which is that white people are so thin-skinned or whatever that he can't walk down the street in the most cosmopolitan city in the world without being hassled for wearing a shirt that everyone here thought was pretty funny, that has existed in some form or another for years?

When Black Panther came out, several white nationalist idiots online claimed that they had been beaten by groups of black people at the theatre, for daring to show up on opening weekend while having white skin. Bogus stories. But a bunch of black people responded, telling them that they were full of shit and in a lot of cases using much nastier language than has been used ITT. So following your "logic", does that validate the racist scumbag's premise - that black people are so violent, thin-skinned and unable to control themselves that they attacked random white people for being at "their" movie?

It's telling that you didn't answer any of the questions I posed to you. Read through his version of events on his Twitter thread, then answer the questions I asked of you, and if you don't see the red flags then you're too far gone. There's no "ideas that upset me" that I don't want to engage with here, I know that white people can be ignorant, racist or overly sensitive. I can just spot a hustler when I see one. If you can't see it here you're blinded by, again, some weird online tribal "left vs right" bullshit.

 

[44nutman]

 

[Roaming East]

i kinda want that shirt...living in eastern Va and this being Redskins fan territory it would probably sell like a boss.

 

[DeJulez]

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/bla...pose-hypocrisy-white-privilege-220329924.html

Apparently it’s white privilege to wear Washington Redskins apparel and this dude walked around in a “Caucasians” shirt to try and offend people. I have a feeling most of his stories of those who got offended are fake. Without video evidence he has no proof anyone said anything. Pretty lame social experiment if you ask me.

White people get mad when people say they have privileges.
It's like getting mad at people going "you got good genes"

So yea I assume they got upset.

 

[SammyPops]

How in the world is an individual defining what they find offensive missing the mark?



So?



There are many, many terms that someone can argue is divisive, racist, etc. . . . doesn't actually make those terms any of those.

So in your personal opinion you believe redskin appears to be a historically racist term because the British used it to describe the type of scalps they'd pay a bounty for?

Either I've missed your point or (not trolling) your argument seems almost nonsensical.

To sum up-- and try to answer your last question- historical context should be the largest determining factor to help us judge racist or not.

A SJW can tell me that the word "1st Nations" is racist af b/c its been replaced by indigenous, and while they are entitled to their opinion, I'm pretty much ignoring it.

Likewise, another person may tell me the word n***** is not racist, and I will likewise ignore them.

 

[drstrangelov]

Why wouldn't he document it on video? Seems like if you wanted to prove this with an experiment of this kind, irrefutable video documentation of it actually happening would be a key part of the experiment, because you will automatically be met with skepticism.



You're the triggered one here, bud. You can't stand it that this guy's credibility is being called into question, and are lashing out at anyone who dare suggests he's full of shit.

I have a feeling your generous lending of credibility, would be far different if this was some random white guy claiming he was harassed by Muslims on the street, for not having his wife covered up.

It's an arbitrary standard, his decision not to videotape himself walking around the city for hours is perfectly within reason, and doesn't impact his credibility at all.

I'm really not bothered by you calling his credibility into question, I've explained repeatedly that it validates his premise. I assure you, I have no problem being proven right.

I would consider the harassment of a white guy and his wife on the street to be far more unusual than passing comments made towards a single person. I wouldn't need video evidence to believe the guy's story, just more details.

If a white guy in a redskins Jersey caught shit from some liberals just walking down the street, or a guy in a maga hat had to deal with some brazen people getting in his face, I'd take him at his word though. Unusual behavior makes me more skeptical, but commonplace behavior I'll accept pretty easily.

 

[drstrangelov]

The logic that you're using is beyond twisted. The fact that people are doubting the word of a guy who has every reason to lie (including a financial stake) and offers no proof (despite it being EXTREMELY easy to provide such in 2018) validates his premise, which is that white people are so thin-skinned or whatever that he can't walk down the street in the most cosmopolitan city in the world without being hassled for wearing a shirt that everyone here thought was pretty funny, that has existed in some form or another for years?

When Black Panther came out, several white nationalist idiots online claimed that they had been beaten by groups of black people at the theatre, for daring to show up on opening weekend while having white skin. Bogus stories. But a bunch of black people responded, telling them that they were full of shit and in a lot of cases using much nastier language than has been used ITT. So following your "logic", does that validate the racist scumbag's premise - that black people are so violent, thin-skinned and unable to control themselves that they attacked random white people for being at "their" movie?

It's telling that you didn't answer any of the questions I posed to you. Read through his version of events on his Twitter thread, then answer the questions I asked of you, and if you don't see the red flags then you're too far gone. There's no "ideas that upset me" that I don't want to engage with here, I know that white people can be ignorant, racist or overly sensitive. I can just spot a hustler when I see one. If you can't see it here you're blinded by, again, some weird online tribal "left vs right" bullshit.

So you're comparing a claim of assault in front of a crowd in a specific time and place, to a passing conversation, and you think my premise would apply evenly to both? You either have poor reading comprehension, or caught in your own foolishness have sunk to lame equivocation. Either way, your attempts to deflect aren't working.

You've never engaged with the story except to deny it happened, that's how we can tell you're afraid of what he's saying. You don't have a response to this happening that coincides with your existing world view, and instead of expanding your thinking, your shrunk down and called the guy a liar. Don't be a coward.

 

[spamking]

Either I've missed your point or (not trolling) your argument seems almost nonsensical.

To sum up-- and try to answer your last question- historical context should be the largest determining factor to help us judge racist or not.

My point is that I personally define what is offensive to me . . . not some historical context or how another person feels towards some particular word.

A SJW can tell me that the word "1st Nations" is racist af b/c its been replaced by indigenous, and while they are entitled to their opinion, I'm pretty much ignoring it.

Likewise, another person may tell me the word n***** is not racist, and I will likewise ignore them.

See . . . you haven't missed my point . . .

 

[HunterSdVa29]

I had two HS's change their mascot, and my alma mater do the same all while I attended

Apparently Monty Montezuma is offensive to Aztecs......wait, what Aztecs?

 

[SammyPops]

My point is that I personally define what is offensive to me . . . not some historical context or how another person feels towards some particular word.



See . . . you haven't missed my point . . .

So you are cool with people using n***** if the personally define it as not racist?

Just curious- what other societal norms do you define based on your personal opinion, paying taxes, hiring practices and so on?

 

[spamking]

So you are cool with people using n***** if the personally define it as not racist?

Dude. I said I personally define what's offensive to ME. Not some other person. Call me ni**er all you want . . . I'm not offended by being called it. Nor am I offended by being called a redskin.

Just curious- what other societal norms do you define based on your personal opinion, paying taxes, hiring practices and so on?

What in the world are you trying to do now? What does paying taxes or who someone hires have to do with what I personally find offensive?

 

[cincymma79]

It's not some scientific study, he's reporting brief interactions he had with people on the street. Do you just assume everyone you talk to is making up everything they say whole cloth if they didn't capture evidence? It's not like he's making some outlandish claims, you just don't like the implication so it's easier to just deny or deflect. Your level of discomfort here only illustrates how triggered thin-skinned white people are about this.

White people don’t care

In fact

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

 

[Wrath of Foamy]

I'm Caucasian and I found the shirt to be humourous.

Three things though.

1) Yahoo blow this shit out of proportion and may have even bent truth regarding hostilities.
2) Americans are drama queens.
3) I'm more angered by our media outlets in the UK, as well as posters, a lot being white, using the word "gammon" as an insult.

 

[Mr. 4K]

Oh Lord. Something tells me that I shouldnt post itt.

 

[wonderbread]

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/bla...pose-hypocrisy-white-privilege-220329924.html

Apparently it’s white privilege to wear Washington Redskins apparel and this dude walked around in a “Caucasians” shirt to try and offend people. I have a feeling most of his stories of those who got offended are fake. Without video evidence he has no proof anyone said anything. Pretty lame social experiment if you ask me.

My girl is of Cherokee decent. Citizen of the nation. Her father and his family grew up on the reservation in Ok. I have yet to hear her complain about these sport teams like the redskins and the Indians etc. - What she does find funny is how now it appears that being Native American is a fad and everyone’s great grandmother was a Cherokee princess. Her father/grandfather and uncle were taught to keep their native ties to themselves since it wasn’t a fad back then. They were looked down upon. They have stories of being beaten for speaking their native language. When my girls father died her uncle also spoke the eulogy in Cherokee and he said it was real hard for him. Memories of being beaten for speakng Cherokee still were very vivid. He had not spoke it since a child.