Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 07-24-2019, 03:09 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 41,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by tim-n-va View Post
White privileged is mostly being given the benefit of doubt, a second chance. White culture is expecting that benefit of the doubt.
Try being over 55 in the job market and looking for that benefit of the doubt.
  #52  
Old 07-24-2019, 03:12 PM
Max S. is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 1,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by tim-n-va View Post
White culture is expecting that benefit of the doubt.
I disagree. The benefit of the doubt is not something I associate with "white culture", it is just a restatement of the presumption of innocence.

White culture can mean many things, but it is not productive to define it as merely being afforded one's rights. Everybody ought to demand that their rights are not infringed, and to expect your rights will be curtailed by default is a form of pessimism. To identify white culture as the opposite of pessimism is to call it a form of optimism, or bliss. To the contrary, "white male culture" is often viewed as a form of privilege - to expect the presumption of innocence for yourself and other white males while being ambivalent or even hostile to same rights of others.

~Max
  #53  
Old 07-24-2019, 05:49 PM
Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 7,538
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post

But that says a lot more about them than it does about the actual views or intentions of the people speaking out against our culturally conditioned expectation of white male dominance.
There are PLENTY of countries out there where white males are NOT dominant.

So I'd guess you would prefer Iran, Saudi Arabia, China... hell most of anywhere in Asia, middle east, Africa, Central and South America.

Which one do you prefer?
  #54  
Old 07-24-2019, 06:47 PM
Rayks Marcial is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 90
Cigars, brandy, playing cards.
  #55  
Old 07-24-2019, 07:31 PM
F. U. Shakespeare is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Baltimore or less
Posts: 4,165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
Which one do you prefer?
Which one do you live in?

The discussion on white male privilege was by default focused on societies where white people are a majority or a controlling minority, until someone used the term "world". (I concede that the countries you've named are not places where I'd want to live as a minority (racial, religious, etc.))

To answer your question:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
So what will replace it? Do you really see some sort of perfectly equal world where everyones views and ways are accepted as equal?
... I would suggest you re-read Kimstu's post, without trying to hijack the conversation to societies we're obviously not talking about.

Are you saying that Americans who aren't white males can't be trusted with democracy, lest they turn the U.S. into a nightmare of white-male subjugation?

Last edited by F. U. Shakespeare; 07-24-2019 at 07:33 PM.
  #56  
Old 07-24-2019, 07:35 PM
UltraVires is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 15,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
Or is it that '50s lovers don't explicitly love it because of the discrimination back then. True enough, but they do say that my type had it good, and don't consider that their type didn't.
That's what I am saying. I didn't live through the 50s so I cannot say if the recollections are accurate of simply a part of rosy recollection or other things. I simply dispute the idea, stated as fact, that people loved the 50s because the blacks were kept in their proper place. I've never heard anyone say or imply that.
  #57  
Old 07-24-2019, 09:25 PM
msmith537 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 27,548
I don't know. I just want to watch some old episodes of Seinfeld and How I Met Your Mother, enjoy a cold bottle of craft beer, change out of my Brooks Brothers work clothes in some flannel J Crew pajamas, throw on some Mumford & Sons and go to bed.
  #58  
Old 07-24-2019, 10:43 PM
UltraVires is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 15,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by msmith537 View Post
I don't know. I just want to watch some old episodes of Seinfeld and How I Met Your Mother, enjoy a cold bottle of craft beer, change out of my Brooks Brothers work clothes in some flannel J Crew pajamas, throw on some Mumford & Sons and go to bed.
Are you sure it is that, or do you just miss the days of the 90s when gays couldn't get married and could be arrested for sodomy?

Note: I know you really don't believe that, but to me there is as much evidence for that as there is to say that people look back on the 50s for racist reasons.
  #59  
Old 07-24-2019, 10:57 PM
UltraVires is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 15,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
You can even see the sense of status and privilege given to white men in our politics. When white men are left behind by the economy (coal miners for example) its a national emergency. Meanwhile service sector jobs are disappearing even faster than coal miner jobs but nobody cares. One reason nobody cares is those jobs are full of minorities and women.

When the opiate epidemic hits white men, its a national emergency and needs government intervention. When the crack epidemic hit the black neighborhoods it was because the people there were animals and we needed to send in violent cops.

When white men feel unheard in politics, everyone acts like 'how can we appeal to white men in the rust belt'. However black people have felt ignored in politics for years, and nobody cares.
Do you have cites for any of this or is it just a rant?

1) Service Sector v. Coal Mine Jobs--This has nothing to do with racism or sexism. Service jobs are generally viewed as dead end jobs and both parties want a way to leave those jobs to the teenagers and get adults out of those jobs into things that can pay a living wage, like coal mining. In my state, coal mining provided quality jobs for a couple of generations of people who made my state economically viable. Now those jobs are gone and it has devastated an entire region. It is debatable whether we should or even can bring back coal, but it is easily explained why the loss of those jobs are a larger issue.

2) Drugs--anyone who used drugs in their home and doesn't bother anyone gets a very low enforcement priority--white or black. When drugs cause turf wars, dead bodies, and quality of life crimes, that is a serious issue--white or black.

3) This one is the most outrageous. The Dems have bought off black voters for years with their proposals. So much so that they get 90+ percent of the vote each time, reliably and without fail. They have been cared for so much in politics that their votes are taken for granted, and for either party, there is not much more each can do with the black vote to win an election.

White people in the rust belt? That was the key in 2016 and will be the key in 2020. One can hardly claim racism with a straight face when you are concentrating of the pivotal demographic that will decide whether you win or lose the election.

If the racial roles were reversed, you don't think that there would be a dismissal of whites and a laser focus on blacks? You think a candidate would say, "Sure, I'll probably lose this election, but at least I take care of the white boys!" That's silly.

You seem to see everything through the tinted lense of racism when they have obvious, non-racial reasons behind them.
  #60  
Old 07-25-2019, 08:59 AM
BeagleJesus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
3) This one is the most outrageous. The Dems have bought off black voters for years with their proposals. So much so that they get 90+ percent of the vote each time, reliably and without fail. They have been cared for so much in politics that their votes are taken for granted, and for either party, there is not much more each can do with the black vote to win an election.
This is bullshit. For generations black folks in the US have had 2 basic choices for political parties: Side with the group that contains damn near every racist white person in the country or side with the group that is at least willing to pay lip service to our political concerns.

Why the fuck would any self respecting black person ever choose the side with damn near all the racist white folks? And in case you were wondering, yes, racist ass republicans are the main reason why most non-white people vote democrat.
  #61  
Old 07-25-2019, 12:17 PM
kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 31,832
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
That's what I am saying. I didn't live through the 50s so I cannot say if the recollections are accurate of simply a part of rosy recollection or other things. I simply dispute the idea, stated as fact, that people loved the 50s because the blacks were kept in their proper place. I've never heard anyone say or imply that.
Or notice it?

Iím reminded of a cartoon I saw back when I was in grade school (1960s). The scene depicted two suburbanite men at a bus stop, discussing the newspaper article whose headline appeared on the paper one of the men was holding. The gist of the headline was a suggestion that problems in the black community could be traced to attitudes within the white community (particularly the suburbs). The caption read (paraphrased from memory): ďHow can it be my attitude that causes the problem? I never give the Negro a second thought.Ē
  #62  
Old 07-25-2019, 02:43 PM
bump is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 18,077
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
When white men feel unheard in politics, everyone acts like 'how can we appeal to white men in the rust belt'. However black people have felt ignored in politics for years, and nobody cares.
That's probably more numbers than anything; there are twice as many white men (or women) out there than there are TOTAL black people. And more than four times the number of white people out there.

It's more pragmatic in a democracy to worry about the larger group- even if they only sway 30% of the white vote, they've already swayed more people than if they swayed 100% of the black vote.

Beyond that, when you're 15% of the population more or less, and geographically distributed, you're by necessity going to get less than 15% of the total representatives.
  #63  
Old 07-25-2019, 04:26 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 46,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
That's what I am saying. I didn't live through the 50s so I cannot say if the recollections are accurate of simply a part of rosy recollection or other things. I simply dispute the idea, stated as fact, that people loved the 50s because the blacks were kept in their proper place. I've never heard anyone say or imply that.
Maybe this analogy will be clearer. There are some people who look back with fondness about plantation culture. Southern gentlemen, southern belles, huge mansions. People who do this never say they love it because slavery was a good thing. Yet you can only truly love plantation culture if you push slavery from your mind - or think it was good.

When we lived in Louisiana in the late '70s we stayed in a plantation house one weekend. Slavery was barely acknowledged. A tour about five years ago of another made the experience of the slaves a big part of the narrative.
Loving the '50s the way the nostalgia buffs do is only possible if you ignore the oppression - which does not imply that someone is explicitly supporting it.
  #64  
Old 07-25-2019, 04:38 PM
UltraVires is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 15,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
Or notice it?

Iím reminded of a cartoon I saw back when I was in grade school (1960s). The scene depicted two suburbanite men at a bus stop, discussing the newspaper article whose headline appeared on the paper one of the men was holding. The gist of the headline was a suggestion that problems in the black community could be traced to attitudes within the white community (particularly the suburbs). The caption read (paraphrased from memory): ďHow can it be my attitude that causes the problem? I never give the Negro a second thought.Ē
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
Maybe this analogy will be clearer. There are some people who look back with fondness about plantation culture. Southern gentlemen, southern belles, huge mansions. People who do this never say they love it because slavery was a good thing. Yet you can only truly love plantation culture if you push slavery from your mind - or think it was good.

When we lived in Louisiana in the late '70s we stayed in a plantation house one weekend. Slavery was barely acknowledged. A tour about five years ago of another made the experience of the slaves a big part of the narrative.
Loving the '50s the way the nostalgia buffs do is only possible if you ignore the oppression - which does not imply that someone is explicitly supporting it.
I don't disagree with either of these statements, but that is never what is claimed. The claim is that people have nostalgia for the 50s because it was a time when they could beat their wives or keep blacks in their place. It is never said that they were simply indifferent or didn't really give it full thought.

The accusation is that white people expressly and unequivocally long for those days of racial oppression and that any other thing they look back on in purely a dog whistle to cover up their true reason for liking the 50s.

And that is not unusual. Most people don't look at a larger picture. If they have a good job, a good home, and take a vacation every once in a while, they are happy. Most people are happy precisely because they are able to ignore a lot of bad shit in the world. When the bad stuff bothers you, that's when the depression and anxiety sets it because you cannot change the world.
  #65  
Old 07-25-2019, 04:57 PM
Haldurson is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 230
Many people can't conceive of themselves as being 'privileged'. You have to first be sensitive to prejudice and differential treatment, either because you are not white, or because you are a member of a different marginalized group or groups.

On the other hand, being part of a marginalized group does not guarantee that you will be sensitive to the situations of others. What I mean is that there are racists and anti-semites and islamophobes and so on among various marginalized groups (which only goes to show you that some people are just plain clueless).

I've experienced both the privilege of being white, as well as the stigma of being born Jewish, of being an atheist, of having a mental illness, of having both asian and mixed race relatives, of having islamic and LGBTQ and hispanic and asian and black and native american friends etc. I've been lucky in that my upbringing and environment was extremely diverse starting from a very young age (plus I had very liberal parents, including my dad who had tried to stop a race riot happening outside our house, and was honored by a church in Harlem in the 1950s or 1960 for his work on their behalf). So yeah, I see what's going on all the time that even liberal friends of mine seem to be blind to.
  #66  
Old 07-25-2019, 05:09 PM
msmith537 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 27,548
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
Are you sure it is that, or do you just miss the days of the 90s when gays couldn't get married and could be arrested for sodomy?

Note: I know you really don't believe that, but to me there is as much evidence for that as there is to say that people look back on the 50s for racist reasons.

Interestingly, I found an old children's book in our collection that was written in 1953. It's basically about what dads do all day in their jobs. Every single character in the book is white. Even the dads who work in what we consider to be more ...multicultural jobs like food service or taxi drivers. And why wouldn't it? 89.3% of the population was white in 1950. Even growing up in the 70s and 80s, I knew like 3 black kids in my class of 250. My college had something like 8% minorities.

"Racism" was never really something I observed much of simply because there wasn't really many people of other races around.
  #67  
Old 07-25-2019, 05:46 PM
UltraVires is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 15,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by msmith537 View Post
Interestingly, I found an old children's book in our collection that was written in 1953. It's basically about what dads do all day in their jobs. Every single character in the book is white. Even the dads who work in what we consider to be more ...multicultural jobs like food service or taxi drivers. And why wouldn't it? 89.3% of the population was white in 1950. Even growing up in the 70s and 80s, I knew like 3 black kids in my class of 250. My college had something like 8% minorities.

"Racism" was never really something I observed much of simply because there wasn't really many people of other races around.
I agree. I graduated from an all-white high school in the early 90s!

However, in our community we still had many of the same issues. Bitching about people on welfare for example. That wasn't directed at blacks, it was white people in my community. Yet, some on this board say that is a mere dog whistle for racism.

"Those" people in town that your mother told you to stay away from. All white people. We didn't have a lot of drugs back then, but the people selling it? White people.

So growing up, I never had any animus towards blacks because I didn't know any. And when I went to college, I still had no animus towards them. In the last 25 years, I have gotten to know many people of different cultures and still have no animus.

That is why it is frustrating in these debates that the accusation of racism because of positions that I have held which have nothing at all to do with race are raised against people like me. Sure, I would accept an argument that because of the situation I grew up in I don't have as much understanding, say, of someone who grew up in a diverse community. But the accusation of racism is outrageous when the people making it have no frame of reference.
  #68  
Old 07-25-2019, 06:56 PM
kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 31,832
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
I don't disagree with either of these statements, but that is never what is claimed.
Perhaps not in so many words. The implication is pretty clear to anyone not willfully blind and deaf to it.

Quote:
The claim is that people have nostalgia for the 50s because it was a time when they could beat their wives or keep blacks in their place. It is never said that they were simply indifferent or didn't really give it full thought. The accusation is that white people expressly and unequivocally long for those days of racial oppression and that any other thing they look back on in purely a dog whistle to cover up their true reason for liking the 50s.
Okay, I’m gonna ask for a cite on that (demonstrably mainstream sources preferred, please. We have enough to to just demonstrating YOUR side’s wrongness; we don’t need to be saddled with the extra burden of fending off axe-grinding loonies who want to be on our side).

Last edited by kaylasdad99; 07-25-2019 at 06:57 PM.
  #69  
Old 07-25-2019, 06:59 PM
kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 31,832
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haldurson View Post
Many people can't conceive of themselves as being 'privileged'. You have to first be sensitive to prejudice and differential treatment, either because you are not white, or because you are a member of a different marginalized group or groups.

On the other hand, being part of a marginalized group does not guarantee that you will be sensitive to the situations of others. What I mean is that there are racists and anti-semites and islamophobes and so on among various marginalized groups (which only goes to show you that some people are just plain clueless).

I've experienced both the privilege of being white, as well as the stigma of being born Jewish, of being an atheist, of having a mental illness, of having both asian and mixed race relatives, of having islamic and LGBTQ and hispanic and asian and black and native american friends etc. I've been lucky in that my upbringing and environment was extremely diverse starting from a very young age (plus I had very liberal parents, including my dad who had tried to stop a race riot happening outside our house, and was honored by a church in Harlem in the 1950s or 1960 for his work on their behalf). So yeah, I see what's going on all the time that even liberal friends of mine seem to be blind to.
Thatís funny, you donít LOOK Jewió

Okay, thatís enough of that.
  #70  
Old 07-25-2019, 07:19 PM
UltraVires is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 15,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
To put it another way, white male culture was American culture in the 1950s. White males could assume dominance over women and minorities, all of whom knew their place. In fact I'd call it White Male Christian Culture, because before the war Jews should know their place also. I didn't get much of this living in a Jewish majority neighborhood, but it was there.
Why some people are so nostalgic for the '50s.
This one. It is "why" people are nostalgic so sayeth the poster.
  #71  
Old 07-25-2019, 07:20 PM
UltraVires is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 15,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
Okay, Iím gonna ask for a cite on that (demonstrably mainstream sources preferred, please. We have enough to to just demonstrating YOUR sideís wrongness; we donít need to be saddled with the extra burden of fending off axe-grinding loonies who want to be on our side).
That is my cite to the post above and repeated many times on this board.
  #72  
Old 07-25-2019, 09:30 PM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck
So what will replace it? Do you really see some sort of perfectly equal world where everyones views and ways are accepted as equal?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
Will the world magically become "perfectly equal" if we (all of us, not just white males) learn to let go of our culturally conditioned expectation of white male dominance? No, of course not.

Will the world be somewhat better if we learn to let go of our culturally conditioned expectation of white male dominance? Yup. [...]

[...] a lot of people who ostensibly support the principles of democracy and equality [...] assume that the real choice is not between equality and inequality, but between inequality that favors one group and inequality that favors another. The only way they can picture a world in which white males are no longer the default/dominant members of society is to imagine white males being replaced by a different group (maybe nonwhite males, maybe females in general) as the default/dominant members of society. [...]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck
There are PLENTY of countries out there where white males are NOT dominant.

So I'd guess you would prefer Iran, Saudi Arabia, China... hell most of anywhere in Asia, middle east, Africa, Central and South America.
Thanks for that textbook example of exactly the sort of false dichotomy I was talking about in the very post you replied to.

Once again: The choice does not have to be between (1) a culturally conditioned expectation of white male dominance and (2) a culturally conditioned expectation of nonwhite male dominance. Letting go of the historical legacy of automatically expecting white males to be the default/dominant individuals in American culture will not automatically turn America into Iran or Saudi Arabia.

But as you can see from this exchange, some people really are convinced that it will. Even if they don't consciously advocate overtly racist or sexist views, the idea of an America where white males don't have that automatic boost in perceived and actual status relative to the rest of the population feels to them like the collapse of civilization.
  #73  
Old 07-25-2019, 09:33 PM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max S. View Post
Everybody ought to demand that their rights are not infringed
Uh-huh, very nice, but the issue here is that some people in a historically and persistently racist/sexist society have an easier time than others getting those demands listened to. That's the problem.

Last edited by Kimstu; 07-25-2019 at 09:33 PM.
  #74  
Old 07-25-2019, 09:59 PM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
So growing up, I never had any animus towards blacks because I didn't know any. And when I went to college, I still had no animus towards them. In the last 25 years, I have gotten to know many people of different cultures and still have no animus.

That is why it is frustrating in these debates that the accusation of racism because of positions that I have held which have nothing at all to do with race are raised against people like me.
The thing is, though, that in a historically and (to a lesser extent) persistently racist society like the US, we all get a background-radiation dose of cultural animus toward black people just through living in our shared culture. Racial bias and inequality filters through our media, our neighborhoods, all our assumptions about what's culturally "normal".

Sure, it's possible for people to consciously reject and push back against those baseline-level amounts of racial bias in our culture. But it's delusional for any of us (white OR nonwhite) to assume that we're somehow magically immune to it just because we never had to think about it when we were growing up.
  #75  
Old 07-25-2019, 10:02 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 41,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
The thing is, though, that in a historically and (to a lesser extent) persistently racist society like the US, we all get a background-radiation dose of cultural animus toward black people just through living in our shared culture. Racial bias and inequality filters through our media, our neighborhoods, all our assumptions about what's culturally "normal".
This is totally and completely wrong.
  #76  
Old 07-25-2019, 10:24 PM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
This is totally and completely wrong.
Nope. We all absorb some kind of awareness of the news articles that disproportionately emphasize black crime, for example. We all hear the everyday language in which words like "animal" and "thug" and "welfare queen" are implicitly coded more "black" than "white", even though they're superficially race-neutral. We all see the disproportionate number of white faces on people like TV news announcers, leading authorities, Congresspeople, models, CEOs. That's the sort of background-radiation-type effect that I mean: the way our historical legacy of racism still subtly influences so much of what seems culturally "normal" to us.

(And a post consisting solely of an unsupported negation of another poster's statements isn't so much an argument or debate but rather mere contradiction.)

Last edited by Kimstu; 07-25-2019 at 10:28 PM.
  #77  
Old 07-25-2019, 10:30 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 41,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
Nope. We all absorb some kind of awareness of the news articles that disproportionately emphasize black crime, for example. We all hear the everyday language in which words like "animal" and "thug" and "welfare queen" are implicitly coded more "black" than "white", even though they're superficially race-neutral. We all see the disproportionate number of white faces on people like TV news announcers, leading authorities, Congresspeople, models, CEOs. That's the sort of background-radiation-type effect that I mean: the way our historical legacy of racism still subtly influences so much of what seems culturally "normal" to us.


I couldnt disagree more. The news- except FOX is pretty well balanced, and the newest crop of Dem frosh congressmemberslooks pretty damn balanced.

I havent heard the term "welfare queen" on mainstream media is a couple decades. When i hear "animal' it is about...animals. Four footed kind. "Thug" is applied to black gangs- because thats what they call themselves.

Maybe you watch Fox too much.

You are starting to sound like Fredric Wertham, except with you it's racism.

Last edited by DrDeth; 07-25-2019 at 10:33 PM.
  #78  
Old 07-25-2019, 10:48 PM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
I couldnt disagree more. The news- except FOX is pretty well balanced, and the newest crop of Dem frosh congressmemberslooks pretty damn balanced.
I like your naive optimism, but unfortunately it doesn't accurately reflect the facts. In the first place, the fact that you have to restrict your counterclaim about Congress to the specific subset of freshman Democrats in order to make it look anything like racially balanced illustrates how feeble that argument is. Congress as a whole is still only about 22% nonwhite, compared to 39% of the US population overall.

And as for racial bias in crime reporting, no, in fact it's not just on Fox.
Quote:
The study conducted in the article Race and Punishment states that current crime coverage strategies aim to increase in the importance of a crime, thus distorting the public sense of who commits crimes, and leads to biased reactions. By over-representing Caucasians as victims of crimes perpetrated by people of color it exaggerates crimes committed by African Americans and downplays victimization of African Americans. [...]

A study by the Sentencing Project reports that African American crime suspects were presented in more threatening contexts than Caucasians; to specify, African American suspects were more often left unnamed and were more likely to be shown as threatening by being depicted in physical custody of the police.

Analyses of television news consistently indicate that African American males are overrepresented as perpetrators and underrepresented as victims, compared to both their Caucasian male counterparts on TV as well as real-world Department of Justice arrest reports. In these news stories, African American suspects are more likely than Caucasians to be portrayed as nameless, menacing, and in the grasp of the police. Some evidence also suggests that audiences know the news they watch misrepresents the reality of race and crime in the United States, and that news executives know their broadcasts scare their audiences.
This isn't about conspiracy theories or accusing the vast majority of Americans of openly endorsing nefarious racial hatred. This is just a rational recognition of how our society as a whole is still non-negligibly influenced by our traditional cultural assumption of white male dominance and racism against black people.

I'm not saying we should go around accusing everybody of being motivated by conscious racism all the time: that would be silly. But it's equally silly to take refuge in the chirpy Pollyannaism (generally covering a lot of white-fragility anxiety) that needs to pretend that the influence of persistent societal racism only ever affects overt racists.

Last edited by Kimstu; 07-25-2019 at 10:50 PM.
  #79  
Old 07-25-2019, 10:56 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 46,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
This one. It is "why" people are nostalgic so sayeth the poster.
But them being at heart nostalgic doesn't mean they come out and say it.
You're surely aware that lots of people are racist and sexist (and not just white males) without consciously seeming themselves as racist and sexist.
And I'd say that few of the nostalgia types change their tune when the problems are pointed out to them.
  #80  
Old 07-25-2019, 10:59 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 41,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
I like your naive optimism, but unfortunately it doesn't accurately reflect the facts. In the first place, the fact that you have to restrict your counterclaim about Congress to the specific subset of freshman Democrats in order to make it look anything like racially balanced illustrates how feeble that argument is. Congress as a whole is still only about 22% nonwhite, compared to 39% of the US population overall.

....

I'm not saying we should go around accusing everybody of being motivated by conscious racism all the time: that would be silly. But it's equally silly to take refuge in the chirpy Pollyannaism (generally covering a lot of white-fragility anxiety) that needs to pretend that the influence of persistent societal racism only ever affects overt racists.
Yeah, but when you take out the white racist GOP faction, Congress is very well balanced.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...ublicans-photo

Proportion of Democrats who are white men will drop from 41% to 38% while Republican figure will climb from 86% to 90%.


"Pollyannaism". "white-fragility anxiety"

Last edited by DrDeth; 07-25-2019 at 11:02 PM.
  #81  
Old 07-25-2019, 11:03 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 46,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by msmith537 View Post
Interestingly, I found an old children's book in our collection that was written in 1953. It's basically about what dads do all day in their jobs. Every single character in the book is white. Even the dads who work in what we consider to be more ...multicultural jobs like food service or taxi drivers. And why wouldn't it? 89.3% of the population was white in 1950. Even growing up in the 70s and 80s, I knew like 3 black kids in my class of 250. My college had something like 8% minorities.

"Racism" was never really something I observed much of simply because there wasn't really many people of other races around.
Bet you anything that the author or at least the editor of that book lived in a place with plenty of black people. But the book did represent the makeup of offices back then, so it was accurate. The thing was, very few people thought twice about it.
It wasn't until the mid-60s that there were black characters on TV that weren't either maids or people named Amos and Andy.
  #82  
Old 07-25-2019, 11:17 PM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Yeah, but when you take out the white racist GOP faction, Congress is very well balanced.
Saying that we can reduce the appearance of racial imbalance in Congress by arbitrarily declaring that a large chunk of the Congressional membership simply shall not be counted is also a pretty feeble argument. (And it also requires you to ignore the fact that an extremely disproportionate number of Democratic Senators are white, not just the Republican ones.)

Like I said, you can't naively divide US culture into a "racist" part and a "racism-free" part. We have parts of American society that are more racist and parts that are less racist, and there's a good argument to be made (I hope) that much of American society is getting substantially less racist with time, but it's nonsensical to claim that any part of American society is totally unaffected by racism.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth
"Pollyannaism".
Well, it's the term that springs to mind when confronted with the kind of resolute denial of uncomfortable realities that you're espousing here.
  #83  
Old 07-26-2019, 12:04 AM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 41,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
Saying that we can reduce the appearance of racial imbalance in Congress by arbitrarily declaring that a large chunk of the Congressional membership simply shall not be counted is also a pretty feeble argument. (And it also requires you to ignore the fact that an extremely disproportionate number of Democratic Senators are white, not just the Republican ones.)

Like I said, you can't naively divide US culture into a "racist" part and a "racism-free" part. We have parts of American society that are more racist and parts that are less racist, and there's a good argument to be made (I hope) that much of American society is getting substantially less racist with time, but it's nonsensical to claim that any part of American society is totally unaffected by racism.


Well, it's the term that springs to mind when confronted with the kind of resolute denial of uncomfortable realities that you're espousing here.
Yeah, we can take out all the racists, why not?

Pretty much I can: "Democrats", Republicans". See? Maybe only 90% right, but pretty damn close. Nice of the racists to label themselves. So, now we know.

"realities"? "Ya well that's just like, you're opinion man." and "I reject your reality and substitute my own."
  #84  
Old 07-26-2019, 03:16 AM
UltraVires is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 15,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
The thing is, though, that in a historically and (to a lesser extent) persistently racist society like the US, we all get a background-radiation dose of cultural animus toward black people just through living in our shared culture. Racial bias and inequality filters through our media, our neighborhoods, all our assumptions about what's culturally "normal".

Sure, it's possible for people to consciously reject and push back against those baseline-level amounts of racial bias in our culture. But it's delusional for any of us (white OR nonwhite) to assume that we're somehow magically immune to it just because we never had to think about it when we were growing up.
I disagree. What are these cultural differences that "we"(my community) hate, not just look at as foreign, but hate or diminish, in blacks?
  #85  
Old 07-26-2019, 09:32 AM
Max S. is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 1,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
Uh-huh, very nice, but the issue here is that some people in a historically and persistently racist/sexist society have an easier time than others getting those demands listened to. That's the problem.
Do you agree with this statement:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max S. View Post
To the contrary, "white male culture" is often viewed as a form of privilege - to expect the presumption of innocence for yourself and other white males while being ambivalent or even hostile to same rights of others.
~Max
  #86  
Old 07-26-2019, 10:10 AM
Max S. is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 1,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
It wasn't until the mid-60s that there were black characters on TV that weren't either maids or people named Amos and Andy.
In sitcoms perhaps, but Nat King Cole had his own show on NBC for about a year. Louis Armstrong appeared as a bandleader on NBC's Producer's Show in the episode "The Lord Don't Play Favorites".

~Max
  #87  
Old 07-26-2019, 02:11 PM
Buck Godot's Avatar
Buck Godot is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MD outside DC
Posts: 5,869
White male culture is right-handed scissors.

You can buy scissors or you can buy special left-handed scissors. To some right handed people it appears discriminatory that there aren't scissors that are built especially for right handed people.
  #88  
Old 07-26-2019, 02:46 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 41,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
...
It wasn't until the mid-60s that there were black characters on TV that weren't either maids or people named Amos and Andy.
Amos & Andy wasnt as bad as you seem to think:


https://www.nytimes.com/1991/07/07/b...os-n-andy.html

https://tv.avclub.com/amos-n-andy-wa...ult-1798239784
  #89  
Old 07-26-2019, 02:51 PM
Scylla is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 16,357

White male culture


According to Hair, the musical


White boys are so pretty
Skin as smooth as milk
White boys are so pretty
Hair like Chinese silk
White boys give me goose bumps
White boys give me chills
When they touch my shoulder
That's the touch that kills
Well, my momma calls 'em lilies
I call 'em Piccadillies
My daddy warns me stay away
I say come on out and play
White boys are so groovy
White boys are so tough
Every time that they're near me
I just can't get enough
White boys are so pretty
White boys are so sweet
White boys drive me crazy
Drive me indiscreet
White boys are so sexy
Legs so long and lean
Love those sprayed-on trousers
Love the love machine
My brother calls 'em rubble
That's my kind of trouble
My daddy warns me "no no no"
But I say "White boys go go go"
White boys are so lovely
Beautiful as girls
I love to run my fingers
And toes through all their curls
Give me a tall
A lean
A sexy
A sweet
A pretty
A juicy
White boys!

Last edited by Scylla; 07-26-2019 at 02:51 PM.
  #90  
Old 07-26-2019, 08:13 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 46,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
I saw it as a kid. Yes it was. I even knew it back then.
The racism was subtle, not outright, and they had to hire black actors to play the characters unlike the radio show, so I guess there is that.
  #91  
Old 07-26-2019, 09:08 PM
msmith537 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 27,548
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
Bet you anything that the author or at least the editor of that book lived in a place with plenty of black people. But the book did represent the makeup of offices back then, so it was accurate. The thing was, very few people thought twice about it.
It wasn't until the mid-60s that there were black characters on TV that weren't either maids or people named Amos and Andy.
I suspect you miss my point that the author probably didn't live in a place with "plenty of black people" because there weren't plenty of black people in 1950.


Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires
That is why it is frustrating in these debates that the accusation of racism because of positions that I have held which have nothing at all to do with race are raised against people like me. Sure, I would accept an argument that because of the situation I grew up in I don't have as much understanding, say, of someone who grew up in a diverse community. But the accusation of racism is outrageous when the people making it have no frame of reference.
It's frustrating because among some left-leaning circles, it's apparently trendy now to bash "white maleness". Like I get that there was and is racism. But now it's like "white male" apparently has to automatically mean "racist" and things are naturally better the more "diverse" and "multicultural" you are.

Like "The Squad" in congress. I don't even know what their ideas are or if they make sense, but it seems to me that people on the left glommed on to them because they are four women of color.
  #92  
Old 07-27-2019, 01:58 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 46,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by msmith537 View Post
I suspect you miss my point that the author probably didn't live in a place with "plenty of black people" because there weren't plenty of black people in 1950.
The author maybe but if the editor lived in New York where the publishing business was, there were plenty of black people. Not that many books get edited out of Iowa.
  #93  
Old 07-27-2019, 04:29 PM
Ukulele Ike is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 17,213
Hey, quit picking on mayonnaise. Mayonnaise is pan-social. Mayonnaise is urban.

Go to any African-American cookout or church social. Taste the delicious potato salad. That’s MAYONNAISE in there.

Show me a Jewish deli that isn’t proud of its egg salad.

Order yourself a Vietnamese Bahn Mi. Give yourself over to lashings of mayonnaise.

I don’t consume much mayonnaise myself, but I’m sick of people laughing at it.
__________________
Uke

Last edited by Ukulele Ike; 07-27-2019 at 04:31 PM.
  #94  
Old 07-27-2019, 05:37 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 46,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ukulele Ike View Post
Hey, quit picking on mayonnaise. Mayonnaise is pan-social. Mayonnaise is urban.

Go to any African-American cookout or church social. Taste the delicious potato salad. Thatís MAYONNAISE in there.

Show me a Jewish deli that isnít proud of its egg salad.

Order yourself a Vietnamese Bahn Mi. Give yourself over to lashings of mayonnaise.

I donít consume much mayonnaise myself, but Iím sick of people laughing at it.
I like mayonnaise just fine, but at a lunch counter I went to when I worked for the post office I had to dissuade the nice ladies who ran it from putting mayonnaise on a salami sandwich.
  #95  
Old 07-27-2019, 07:21 PM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max S. View Post
Do you agree with this statement:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max S.
To the contrary, "white male culture" is often viewed as a form of privilege - to expect the presumption of innocence for yourself and other white males while being ambivalent or even hostile to same rights of others.
I don't agree that that's an accurate or clear description of the way "privilege" is typically used, especially with reference to the perspective of white people and male people. The weird bits in particular are the narrow focus on "presumption of innocence" and the suggestion of conscious indifference or even hostility to other people's rights.

As for whether it's an accurate description of how "white male culture" is "often viewed", all I can say is that I haven't encountered it before, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
  #96  
Old 07-27-2019, 07:31 PM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Yeah, we can take out all the racists, why not?
Because if we do, then we're completely distorting the concepts of "shared culture" and "society as a whole" that I've been explicitly referencing. Racists are Americans too, and they influence the American zeitgeist just like the rest of us do.

Pretending that all aspects of racism in American culture can be treated as some kind of condition that's entirely restricted to overt racists, which all the rest of us are completely immune to and unaffected by, is a white-fragility fantasy. Sure, we don't like thinking that we can be affected by racism even if we consciously reject racist opinions, but we won't get anywhere by just shutting our eyes to such a fundamental fact of social psychology.
  #97  
Old 07-27-2019, 07:38 PM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
What are these cultural differences that "we"(my community) hate, not just look at as foreign, but hate or diminish, in blacks?
It's not about "your community" and specific "cultural differences". It's about cultural prejudices in American society as a whole.

I mean, I get that what you want to believe is that you have a completely objective view of black people because you never knew any while you were growing up, and therefore were not influenced in any way by white racism against them, and consequently every opinion you have about any black person now is based on a purely rational and unbiased assessment of them as an individual. But for a white person in a historically and persistently racist society, that's just not very realistic.
  #98  
Old 07-27-2019, 07:53 PM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by msmith537
I suspect you miss my point that the author probably didn't live in a place with "plenty of black people" because there weren't plenty of black people in 1950.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
The author maybe but if the editor lived in New York where the publishing business was, there were plenty of black people. Not that many books get edited out of Iowa.
Also, there were "plenty of black people" in 1950. Even if black people were only about 10% of the US population then, that's still nearly 1 in 10.

If you're writing a book about "what dads do all day" showing a whole bunch of different working-class and middle-class occupations, with illustrations depicting the dads and people they interact with, you're presumably illustrating up to dozens of different individuals. Not including any black people, not one, among those individuals is very unlikely to be just accidental. It reflects the segregation-era mindset of the white majority regarding themselves as the default "normal" "regular" people, and the substantial black minority as anything from merely peripheral to outright invisible.
  #99  
Old 07-27-2019, 08:27 PM
msmith537 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 27,548
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
The author maybe but if the editor lived in New York where the publishing business was, there were plenty of black people. Not that many books get edited out of Iowa.
Perhaps. What I think is actually weirder is that our copy was actually a reprint published in 2011. And yet no one thought to update the illustrations.
  #100  
Old 07-27-2019, 09:37 PM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by msmith537 View Post
What I think is actually weirder is that our copy was actually a reprint published in 2011. And yet no one thought to update the illustrations.
Btw, if what you're talking about is the Little Golden Book Daddies by Janet Frank, then I counted between 50 and 60 individuals depicted in the illustrations on just the first 6 or 7 pages (out of 24) visible at that link. Every last one of 'em white.

As for why they didn't update the illustrations in the 2011 reprint, just read the customer reviews. Plenty of people like the "old-fashioned" and "traditional" or "retro" style of the book (some specifically remembering it from an earlier edition in their younger days) to the extent of leaving an Amazon review saying so. A large number of the reviews commented that the book was somewhat out of date in terms of gender roles, but by my count no more than three of the 140+ reviews I read made any mention of all the daddies being white (not to mention all the other white people in the illustrations).

I'd be willing to bet that at least most of those reviewers who praised the book's "traditional" "bygone" "non-PC" appeal were not actually advocating for excluding black people from representation in it, and wouldn't have explicitly considered its all-whiteness one of its positive features. But they were overwhelmingly able just to ignore the issue and like the book anyway. Even if racial segregation isn't overtly a reason why they like the 1950s, they're able to completely disregard it in their emotional assessment of the 1950s. That's an example of the ways that implicit societal racism can affect even people who reject overt racism.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:07 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017