Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 09-23-2018, 05:18 PM
Ambivalid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 14,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
You mean all the "shut-up-and-wait" stuff that didn't work before?
I'm not familiar with the term quoted above.
  #102  
Old 09-23-2018, 06:39 PM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 36,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by etasyde View Post
If you read the context of the quotes (from this board), that's what's happening.


How did you read this as anything else?
How do you read it as being about anyone who disagrees with Clinton? It specifically refers to "their candidate." It very clearly is about Sanders supporters, and not just anyone who criticizes Clinton.

I criticized Clinton a lot. I was never called a Bernie Bro. And, heck, I actually said I preferred Sanders over Clinton. What I didn't do is act like the Bernie Bro and glorify Sanders while attacking Clinton. I actually got that, despite their differences, both were on the same side.

I didn't, however, engage in the conspiracy rhetoric. I made sure my criticisms were constructive criticisms. I recognized that Clinton was the favorite to win, and accepted that. I focused my ire on Trump, not someone on the same side.

And I sure as hell didn't threaten to vote for Trump if Sanders lost. Or say I'd sit out the election and not try to stop him.
  #103  
Old 09-23-2018, 06:44 PM
MrDibble's Avatar
MrDibble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 26,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambivalid View Post
I'm not familiar with the term quoted above.
Maybe you're familiar with "Shut Up And Dribble"? How about "Don't Be So Uppity"?
  #104  
Old 09-23-2018, 07:02 PM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 36,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Nylock View Post
Oh, so there is a consensus among "experts" on this issue? I never knew.
I presume this is snark. But that means you're not interested in actually debating the topic. And that would be pointless.

So I will instead respond like it's not snark. Yes, there a fairly broad consensus. It doesn't take much to notice. White people saying the n-word? Generally considered racist. Yet you said your friends were debating that. Seems they aren't representative.

Where there is debate is stuff like whether merely mentioning the word (without using it) is acceptable. And there's also some debate on whether "nigger" and "nigga" are the same word, with some people saying that the latter is sometimes okay but the former is never okay.

You were claiming liberals don't pay attention to what black people say about racism. But black people are the ones basically calling the shots on anti-black racism. Who started BLM? It wasn't white people.

My position on what is and isn't racism against black people is pretty much entirely informed by black people. And other liberals on this board have said similar.

You attacked our positions not based on what they are, but on whether we were listening to black people. So that is my response.
  #105  
Old 09-23-2018, 07:30 PM
Ambivalid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 14,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
Maybe you're familiar with "Shut Up And Dribble"? How about "Don't Be So Uppity"?
I'm confused. This sounds like the historically condescending attitudes from some in the white community towards those in black communities that are speaking out against racism. While related, it's not the issue I was discussing. It's not exclusively black Americans who are trying to spread awareness of white privilege, there are significant portions of white America doing so as well. It is this combined group that I referred to when suggesting that a less accusatory, confrontational strategy be adopted in order to most effectively reach the goals of those of us wishing to ultimately dismantle "white privilege". Your replies would only be relevant if I was speaking exclusively to the black communities. Which i certainly am not.

Last edited by Ambivalid; 09-23-2018 at 07:30 PM.
  #106  
Old 09-23-2018, 08:39 PM
Mr. Nylock is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Bed
Posts: 3,093
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
I presume this is snark. But that means you're not interested in actually debating the topic. And that would be pointless.
The idea that there even is such a thing as "expert" in matters such as this is absurd on its face - it's not a point I want to debate here and now, but if it's something you want to go back and forth on, like when we're bored and battling insomnia in the wee hours of the morning and have nothing to do but argue subtle points about the meaning of various things I might still be up. Some nights I'm not sleeping so well other nights I'm out, it's hard to predict.

Quote:
So I will instead respond like it's not snark. Yes, there a fairly broad consensus. It doesn't take much to notice. White people saying the n-word? Generally considered racist. Yet you said your friends were debating that. Seems they aren't representative.
Thank you for taking the time to respond to my thoughts in a serious way; I mean this sincerely. Some of my responses to you, may seem pedantic at first blush, however, I believe you are misrepresenting what I say by using words that are distinctly different, with subtle yet important differences in meaning.

The first thing I want to correct is that I did not say friends, they are coworkers. I think this is important. If these were friends I would not bothered to post in this thread - I would not feel that I have anything relevant enough to even bother writing about.

Why is this distinction important? I believe it matters because in this situation we are not choosing to be in each others company, we are required to work alongside each other day in day out because we have the required skill to do the work that needs to be done. The relevance to this is that this interaction over the years has put me into contact with opinions and ideas distinctly broader and more complex than what I see expressed by my friends (I have a mix of minority and non-minority friends).

Quote:
Where there is debate is stuff like whether merely mentioning the word (without using it) is acceptable. And there's also some debate on whether "nigger" and "nigga" are the same word, with some people saying that the latter is sometimes okay but the former is never okay.
This is nothing close to what I said. There is and has been considerable debate about the appropriate use of these and other racial slurs, none of what I said should lead you to the conclusion that this is what any or all of it was about. Jumping to this conclusion only indicates that you rarely have these kinds of conversations.

Quote:
You were claiming liberals don't pay attention to what black people say about racism. But black people are the ones basically calling the shots on anti-black racism. Who started BLM? It wasn't white people.
Again, I never said liberals in any of my analysis; once more you are inserting words that I did not use. Why is this significant? I believe that OP is describing a broad problem that does not necessarily fit into neat categories of political affiliation. Also, saying I said liberal you are ascribing a level of partisanship to my analysis I find odious.

Implying that BLM is calling the shots on on anti-black racism, with the assumption that it is highly regarded by an overwhelming majority of black people is just another type of stereotyping in my opinion. Beyond that, is a decentralized newly formed movement such as BLM really equipped to flesh out all these more subtle matters of usage and context.

Quote:
You attacked our positions not based on what they are, but on whether we were listening to black people. So that is my response.
The OP isn't necessarily about positions, it is about reactions and feelings.
  #107  
Old 09-24-2018, 09:09 AM
MrDibble's Avatar
MrDibble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 26,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambivalid View Post
I'm confused. This sounds like the historically condescending attitudes from some in the white community towards those in black communities that are speaking out against racism. While related, it's not the issue I was discussing. It's not exclusively black Americans who are trying to spread awareness of white privilege, there are significant portions of white America doing so as well. It is this combined group that I referred to when suggesting that a less accusatory, confrontational strategy be adopted in order to most effectively reach the goals of those of us wishing to ultimately dismantle "white privilege". Your replies would only be relevant if I was speaking exclusively to the black communities. Which i certainly am not.
No, it's still relevant - I'm saying this is just an extension of that same "change only at the pace the privileged are most comfortable with" attitude to both the Blacks and their allies (as was the case in the days of Civil Rights too).
  #108  
Old 09-28-2018, 10:34 AM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,695
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
With regards to BLM, Damuri Ajashi, I've referenced statistics that dispute your 3x number -- specifically, the Pro Publica report (linked multiple times -- I can find it again if someone needs it) that found that young black men were 21 times more likely to be shot by police than young white men, though the criminal differences were far, far smaller, and you ignored it. So it's not a question of data vs anecdotes -- it's different data and different understandings of the facts.
There is NO dispute about my 3x number its statistical FACT based on the admittedly incomplete but still statistically relevant data we have. The statistics you derive from incomplete data (all data suffers from this but particularly incomplete data) becomes less and less reliable the more you parse it.

The article you link is parsing the data to the point where the sample size is losing its statistical significance. This is bad science.

The article you link tries to derive conclusions based on 40 shootings over a 3 year period. By that rationale the ONE shooting of one Asian child under 14 makes Asian males under 14 are 3 times more likely to be shot and killed than white males under 14. Your statistics are not statistically relevant. No other data is presented in the article.

There may very well be a systemic cops problem but the gross data does not point to a race problem and trying to reach conclusions from data that is not collected to determine your particular hypothesis means that you are not correcting for reasonable variables.
  #109  
Old 09-28-2018, 11:00 AM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,695
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambivalid View Post
These posts bring up an important point. It involves asking what the ultimate goals are of those who bandy about such terms and phrases as "if you are white you are racist" or "white fragility" or for the sake of this discussion, even "white privilege". Ostensibly, the goal is to spread awareness of widespread, systematic and institutional racism, from which every single white American derives some level of benefit. So if the goal is to raise awareness which leads to personal introspection and ultimately, hopefully, long-term change, it seems to me these rhetorical devices are an extremely ineffecient, even self-sabotaging means to achieving those goals.

This is because the people most in need of enlightenment in re to these issues are not going to be receptive to a message that from the outset labels them as a racist. Or even of having some sort of "privilege" not granted to minorities. The reality is, if you are genuinely interested in reaching those people who are most in the dark-and not just trying to shame them and thus elevate yourself, you need to approach and frame the issues in a decidely not-so-hostile, accusatory manner. I mean, how well has the current method been at affecting anything but closing minds?

ETA: I want to be clear, I do not dispute the validity of the terms or phrases I mentioned. I meant that in the context of spreading awareness and sparking introspection, they seem decidely wrong-headed.
I think that the terms white privilege and white fragility could not have been better designed to close minds. At least with "white privilege" it sort of tracks what the term is trying convey. White fragility OTOH is not very descriptive of the sort of racial defensiveness that some white people have when discussing race.
  #110  
Old 09-28-2018, 11:07 AM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,695
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
You mean all the "shut-up-and-wait" stuff that didn't work before?
Yes. That is exactly what he means.

You realize that this is a democracy and white people account for about 75% of all voters. You can't just shout them into silence and then assume that your shouting will convince them to vote your way.
  #111  
Old 09-28-2018, 11:15 AM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,695
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
No, it's still relevant - I'm saying this is just an extension of that same "change only at the pace the privileged are most comfortable with" attitude to both the Blacks and their allies (as was the case in the days of Civil Rights too).
This attitude is indeed very critical race theory. They are somewhat critical of the civil rights movement for moving at the fastest pace that white people would allow. There is a reason for that. White people were an even larger majority then. They couldn't demand anything that they couldn't convince the majority to give them.
  #112  
Old 09-28-2018, 12:06 PM
Gyrate is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 24,118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
I think that the terms white privilege and white fragility could not have been better designed to close minds. At least with "white privilege" it sort of tracks what the term is trying convey. White fragility OTOH is not very descriptive of the sort of racial defensiveness that some white people have when discussing race.
"Minds closing" at the use of the term "white fragility" is pretty much the fucking definition of "white fragility".
  #113  
Old 09-28-2018, 12:50 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 36,159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
There is NO dispute about my 3x number its statistical FACT based on the admittedly incomplete but still statistically relevant data we have. The statistics you derive from incomplete data (all data suffers from this but particularly incomplete data) becomes less and less reliable the more you parse it.

The article you link is parsing the data to the point where the sample size is losing its statistical significance. This is bad science.

The article you link tries to derive conclusions based on 40 shootings over a 3 year period. By that rationale the ONE shooting of one Asian child under 14 makes Asian males under 14 are 3 times more likely to be shot and killed than white males under 14. Your statistics are not statistically relevant. No other data is presented in the article.

There may very well be a systemic cops problem but the gross data does not point to a race problem and trying to reach conclusions from data that is not collected to determine your particular hypothesis means that you are not correcting for reasonable variables.
Here's the ProPublica report:

https://www.propublica.org/article/d...lack-and-white

It makes its conclusions based on analyzing over 1200 shootings over a 3 year period. So I'm not sure what you're talking about. It analyzed the limited federal data available for police shootings.
  #114  
Old 10-01-2018, 04:22 AM
fedman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 229
Quote:
Originally Posted by JB99 View Post
While I think racism and sexism should be called out MORE often, the problem is that (A) nobody wants to admit to being racist and (B) people have different definitions for how ‘racism’ or ‘sexism’ is defined.

First, literally everyone holds some level of racist/sexist ideas, even if only implicitly. But the rhetoric is such that if a person says something impolite or ignorant, we immediately jump to saying “This person is a racist,” which is synonymous with “evil.” The assumption that ‘racist = evil’ causes people to shut down and avoid critically examining their behavior. Since no one wants to admit to being racist and the rhetoric against accused racists is so vitriolic, we have big obstacles that prevent understanding and actually improving people’s behavior.

The second half is that many people assume that you are only ‘racist’ if you are ‘a racist,’ in the sense that racists are people who wear white hoods. Explicit, overt racism/sexism is their threshold. Another definition I’ve heard is that “racism” is only when the powerful group exercises their power over the minority group. (This definition implies it is impossible for anyone to be racist against white people.)

At the same time, there is another extreme that girl’s accusations of racism over practically any trivial thing. If a white person wear dreadlocks, that’s racism. If a white girl wears a Chinese dress, that’s racism. I once had someone tell me I was “racist” because I didn’t like the depiction of sexualized underage girls in Asian pop culture. I once had someone tell me I was a “bigot” because I remarked that a fictional character’s sexual orientation was not relevant to the plot of a story.

I want to be sympathetic, but it’s really hard when people hurl accusations of racism over the most inconsequential chickenshit. I suspect the problem would be easier to solve if we could come to some common consensus on what “racism” and “sexism” actually means.
what is left out is Jews claiming 'anti-Semitism" whenever a Jewish person is accused of something, like Crown Heights hit and run murder (more ironic is calling semitic arabs anti-Semitic)
  #115  
Old 10-01-2018, 04:30 AM
fedman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 229
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet View Post
Okay, so the question "has anyone ever used accusations of racism/sexism/bigotry to dodge/win a debate?" is fucking trivial. Of course they have. It's a thing, just like saying "Well, you're a woman, so obviously I win this debate" is a thing. My problem is that people blow it way the fuck out of proportion. There is an entire cottage industry on the right acting like political correctness is strangling public discourse. As if the biggest concern for anyone who is worried about free speech absolutely must be the people who use accusations of racism/sexism/bigotry to shut down speech they don't like.

And it works. It's the core of Trump's message. The list of right-wing shitheads who have made a career on youtube by complaining these people - often just one or two shitheads on twitter - is staggering. Most of the republican message these days, to the degree that it's effective, is either about guns, abortion, or "sticking it to the SJWs".

(Seriously, this is a really instructive case - one or two people on Twitter said they were a bit uncomfortable about the jokes in the Doom Eternal trailer, and there are dozens of videos taking the piss out of those handful of tweets. Some of them have hundreds of thousands of views. This sort of intentional exaggeration is, in my experience, far more common than actual cases of people shutting down debate by shouting "bigot".)

This shit works. It allows reactionary right-wing douchebags to effectively turn free speech into a wedge issue, acting as though anyone who supports social justice is anti-free-speech, or supports the actions of any given idiot who says something stupid on twitter. And in doing so, they amplify the voices who do inappropriately yell "sexist/racist/bigot" far beyond their normal reach. They nutpick, which leads to people believing this is a common problem, rather than a very rare one.

This is why I have a problem with the way this debate is framed.
but you're ignoring the left-wing censorship of other (read non-pc) viewpoints via protests on campuses and inside academia
  #116  
Old 10-01-2018, 10:00 AM
Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 7,980
Quote:
Originally Posted by fedman View Post
but you're ignoring the left-wing censorship of other (read non-pc) viewpoints via protests on campuses and inside academia
Ever heard the phrase about reaping what you sew?

I agree the lefties on college campuses totally make the case for conservatives. Consider white people told to stay off campus at Evergreen: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/...-controversies

White people told not to walk across Berkeley. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...stop-white-st/

Georgetown telling white students to not attend an event: https://reason.com/blog/2018/05/18/g...o-white-allies

Why dont truly open minded liberals stop this crap? Instead we get "well now you know how we feel" crap.
  #117  
Old 10-01-2018, 10:09 AM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,676
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
Georgetown telling white students to not attend an event: https://reason.com/blog/2018/05/18/g...o-white-allies
Not sure what you are reading, but I don't see in that article where "Georgetown" was telling white students to not attend an event. Looks like the event organizers were telling them.
  #118  
Old 10-01-2018, 10:22 AM
MrDibble's Avatar
MrDibble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 26,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
You realize that this is a democracy and white people account for about 75% of all voters. You can't just shout them into silence and then assume that your shouting will convince them to vote your way.
I'm not trying to convince anyone to vote away discrimination in broader society. At least, not the same people who currently maintain it by their inaction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
This attitude is indeed very critical race theory.
You say that like it's a bad thing...
Quote:
They are somewhat critical of the civil rights movement for moving at the fastest pace that white people would allow. There is a reason for that.
Yes. I believe it's called "white fragility"

Of course, that didn't make it a good reason.
  #119  
Old 10-01-2018, 12:06 PM
Budget Player Cadet is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,722
Quote:
Originally Posted by fedman View Post
but you're ignoring the left-wing censorship of other (read non-pc) viewpoints via protests on campuses and inside academia
Have you ever been on a campus?
  #120  
Old 10-01-2018, 12:22 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 41,821
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
Consider white people told to stay off campus at Evergreen: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/...-controversies
Consider that in the sense that I consider the Sword of Shannara novels--i.e., poorly-written fantasy? Or consider that in the sense that it's a pernicious falsehood propagated by right-wing pundits looking to smear the left?

I certainly can't consider that in the sense that I consider real things that actually happened, because white people were NOT told to stay off campus at Evergreen. I'm a little bewildered at your repetition of this objective nonsense, given that I've copiously cited debunking articles in the past. If I thought it'd make any difference, I'd cite them again.

BPC's theory--that small events by tiny minorities of leftists are twisted by right-wing pundits in order to fool conservatives like UrbanRedneck who don't take the time to vet their sources--seems ever more accurate.
  #121  
Old 10-01-2018, 01:01 PM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,676
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
BPC's theory--that small events by tiny minorities of leftists are twisted by right-wing pundits in order to fool conservatives like UrbanRedneck who don't take the time to vet their sources--seems ever more accurate.
This is definitely true. Similarly, somehow a moronic tweet by some random person that is liked by 100 people has the exact same importance as a moronic tweet by members of our government that affects hundreds of millions of people. I never did get that.
  #122  
Old 10-01-2018, 04:11 PM
Larry Borgia's Avatar
Larry Borgia is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 10,713
Quote:
Originally Posted by manson1972 View Post
Not sure what you are reading, but I don't see in that article where "Georgetown" was telling white students to not attend an event. Looks like the event organizers were telling them.
That, and I can't see the slightest reason why someone who doesn't go to school there would care about this.
  #123  
Old 10-01-2018, 04:44 PM
Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 7,980
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
Consider that in the sense that I consider the Sword of Shannara novels--i.e., poorly-written fantasy? Or consider that in the sense that it's a pernicious falsehood propagated by right-wing pundits looking to smear the left?

I certainly can't consider that in the sense that I consider real things that actually happened, because white people were NOT told to stay off campus at Evergreen. I'm a little bewildered at your repetition of this objective nonsense, given that I've copiously cited debunking articles in the past. If I thought it'd make any difference, I'd cite them again.

BPC's theory--that small events by tiny minorities of leftists are twisted by right-wing pundits in order to fool conservatives like UrbanRedneck who don't take the time to vet their sources--seems ever more accurate.
Are you kidding?

Just watch this video of the white teacher being attacked:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bO1agIlLlhg

What was this womans "crime'? She showed up that day! The video also shows other staff including the college president being attacked.

Yes, I have read some debunking sites like this: https://psmag.com/education/the-real...rgreen-college . But how do you "debunk" that video?

I'm not convinced. If their really was no story here why did the campus chief of police resign? Why did the college have to pay off all those teachers and staff? Why is there enrollment down 20%?

They did it again this year: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...-white-people/

This article also shows a poster that says "POC Only". https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/r...t-at-what-cost

Why do they let the lunatics take over a college anyways?
  #124  
Old 10-01-2018, 05:07 PM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Continental Divide
Posts: 5,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
Are you kidding?

Just watch this video of the white teacher being attacked:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bO1agIlLlhg

What was this womans "crime'? She showed up that day! The video also shows other staff including the college president being attacked.

Yes, I have read some debunking sites like this: https://psmag.com/education/the-real...rgreen-college . But how do you "debunk" that video?

I'm not convinced. If their really was no story here why did the campus chief of police resign? Why did the college have to pay off all those teachers and staff? Why is there enrollment down 20%?

They did it again this year: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...-white-people/

This article also shows a poster that says "POC Only". https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/r...t-at-what-cost

Why do they let the lunatics take over a college anyways?
For the same reason you are lumping every individual who is trying to fight the very real problem of race in with a group of individuals who paid for their transgressions.

While it may help self-justify labeling individuals as less than human, blaming the many for actions of the few is intellectually dishonest.

It is simply a case of confirmation bias to avoid the more complicated aspects of the issue.

Plopping all people in the same bucket is far from fair when nothing you have offered demonstrates this is even a large minority let alone the majority of actors.

Last edited by rat avatar; 10-01-2018 at 05:09 PM.
  #125  
Old 10-01-2018, 05:17 PM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Continental Divide
Posts: 5,420
Just in case you don't read my link above, can you justify why you aren't equally outraged by this?

Quote:
Near the end of the semester, Evergreen was closed for three days because of threats from people who were opposed to the student protests, and officials elected to move its graduation ceremony off campus.
  #126  
Old 10-01-2018, 05:52 PM
Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 7,980
Quote:
Originally Posted by rat avatar View Post
For the same reason you are lumping every individual who is trying to fight the very real problem of race in with a group of individuals who paid for their transgressions.

While it may help self-justify labeling individuals as less than human, blaming the many for actions of the few is intellectually dishonest.
"Paid for their Transgressions"? Right? Are you kidding? It said the punishments range from warnings to "community service". Oh yeah, that makes sense. Punish a student by forcing them to work for the same crazy liberal/progressive causes they already support!

But your right. I dont blame the students so much as the idiots in charge for allowing this.

Please, Please... if you find a site that actually shows how many students got off with just a warning (which I bet they laughed at), had to do "community service" at the leftist/progressive organization they themselves choose, and to how many were actually suspended - please post it.

Here is a good video of the 20 most outrageous things done at Evergreen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJ4mnQ2mV8Q

Everything from attacking staff members to demanding no homework!
  #127  
Old 10-01-2018, 05:58 PM
Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 7,980
Quote:
Originally Posted by rat avatar View Post
Just in case you don't read my link above, can you justify why you aren't equally outraged by this?
Sure that was also bad. The lunatics were allowed to run the asylum and now they are paying for it.

Can you justify the crazies barricading the white staff in their offices, refusing to allow them to leave or even use the restroom, and demanding they be fired?

"Hey hey, ho ho, these racists teachers have got to go..."

Do you think they deserved that?
  #128  
Old 10-01-2018, 06:06 PM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Continental Divide
Posts: 5,420
You are still missing the point-But I will move on.

While I get you are making the argument that some how white people are so weak and feeble as to be permanently destroyed by some teenagers taunting them or demanding no homework...

The main thing I see in that video you posted is that it was posted by an individual who is terrified of ideas they don't understand and which is using white supremacist language every single time the teachers demonstrate that they are not suffering from abject terror by the students behavior.

Note at 2:56 where the terms "SJW" and "cukery"

I would suggest that you have an honest discussion with someone who isn't as terrified by the prospect of having equal rights for all Americans. I think that you will find they are not ashamed of who they are, or afraid.

If you keep sticking to media sources like the one you offered, you are only going to hear the propaganda from a group that only came together due to their irrational fears and ignorance.

The shame that those groups are selling is self imposed and merely plays the role of maintaining their irrational beliefs.

You don't even have to resort to authors in these other demonized dehumanized groups you offered above.
  #129  
Old 10-01-2018, 06:12 PM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Continental Divide
Posts: 5,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
Sure that was also bad. The lunatics were allowed to run the asylum and now they are paying for it.

Can you justify the crazies barricading the white staff in their offices, refusing to allow them to leave or even use the restroom, and demanding they be fired?

"Hey hey, ho ho, these racists teachers have got to go..."

Do you think they deserved that?
No I just don't cower when teenagers react in response to very real social problems.

Despite your implications not all of us are terrified by these actions. When people have been wronged for a long time and silenced they tend to blow off some steam once they finally get an opportunity to not be silenced.

A serious question, have you ever spent much time with teenagers even when they haven't been subject to institutionalized bias and racism?
  #130  
Old 10-01-2018, 06:38 PM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Continental Divide
Posts: 5,420
Urbanredneck,

Before you dismiss this as a SJW statement, take the time to consider it.


There is a typical human behavior called the fundamental attribution error or attribution effect. This behavior typically takes active, intentional effort to not be subject to it so remember this is not a judgmental claim on my part.
For people who you consider to belong to other groups the tendency is to apply moral judgments to their actions rather than considering external factors.

For people who do consider to be in your group the tenancy is to downplay actions and intent or to better take external factors into consideration.

This is true for people who drive different brands of cars, like other sports teams or for those who belong to other races.
These attribution errors are why despite my request to address the very real threats of violence by people who didn't like the protests you ignored that part of my argument and focused on your pre-existing narrative in your argument.

With the understanding that I am making no claims about your beliefs the jargon I mentioned before is deeply rooted in white nationalism. White nationalism, like many mass movements leverages our human limitations to grow their base. The themes in that youtube video are directly adapted from writings by an organization founded by Wesley A. Swift and Richard Girnt Butler who also founded and ran the Aryan Nations.

While I have absolutely no doubt that you almost certainly didn't know the origins of this propaganda, the fact that they are taken directly from these groups are exactly why they elicit accusations of raicsm/sexism/bigotrywhen they are used when people do know their origins.

If I was proselytizing with bible verses people would assume I am Christian and that same logic works in this case.

If you feel like the intent of your message is being lost by people resorting to labeling your ideas as such it may behoove you to simply change the terms you are using and the citations you offer to avoid references to terminology that was born directly from the white supremacist movement.

Last edited by rat avatar; 10-01-2018 at 06:42 PM.
  #131  
Old 10-01-2018, 07:21 PM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 36,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Nylock View Post
The idea that there even is such a thing as "expert" in matters such as this is absurd on its face - it's not a point I want to debate here and now, but if it's something you want to go back and forth on, like when we're bored and battling insomnia in the wee hours of the morning and have nothing to do but argue subtle points about the meaning of various things I might still be up. Some nights I'm not sleeping so well other nights I'm out, it's hard to predict.
No I'm not interested in such a debate. I'm pretty sure it's going to boil down to the definition of expert, because, with mine, it seems so utterly obvious there are experts. There are people who study racism and have made it their life's work. And there is a fairly broad agreement on what is and isn't racism--the debates are in the nuances.

As for the rest, we're talking past each other so much and have gone so far afield that I think we'd just be going further off the road to keep on.

Since I have so thoroughly misunderstood you, I will ask you the most basic of questions: what is your answer to the OP?

Mine is basically "no." At least, among those who are actually anti-racist, there is very little use of "racist" to try and shut down debates. And, rather than the word being watered down, it is being artificially limited, because people get too insulted by even suggesting the idea that something might be racist.

I do, however, see a small but worrying tendency of people being called racist for saying anti-racist things. I recently saw a video making fun of racist remarks made towards her. And she was called a racist for making fun of them.

And here's my second question: what relevance does your second post have? What are you saying about the topic of the thread? I clearly misunderstood your point, so could you make it more clear?
  #132  
Old 10-01-2018, 07:31 PM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 36,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by fedman View Post
but you're ignoring the left-wing censorship of other (read non-pc) viewpoints via protests on campuses and inside academia
Protests are themselves a form of free speech. They cannot be a form of censorship.

That said, you can have examples where people go beyond protesting. Where they do more than just stand and shout. Where they threaten physical harm, or, worse, actually commit it. Where they artificially entrap people.

The problem is, the protests that conservatives talk about tend to just be protests. If the conservative speaker decides not to have a debate, then it is labeled "censorship." Or they will say that they shouldn't be allowed to speak, which is then called "censorship," when it is really just stating their opinion.

The cries of censorship by the right are to the point where many on the left just ignore it, as we assume it wasn't really censorship. It was someone using their speech to disagree.
  #133  
Old 10-01-2018, 07:50 PM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 36,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambivalid View Post
These posts bring up an important point. It involves asking what the ultimate goals are of those who bandy about such terms and phrases as "if you are white you are racist" or "white fragility" or for the sake of this discussion, even "white privilege". Ostensibly, the goal is to spread awareness of widespread, systematic and institutional racism, from which every single white American derives some level of benefit. So if the goal is to raise awareness which leads to personal introspection and ultimately, hopefully, long-term change, it seems to me these rhetorical devices are an extremely ineffecient, even self-sabotaging means to achieving those goals.

This is because the people most in need of enlightenment in re to these issues are not going to be receptive to a message that from the outset labels them as a racist. Or even of having some sort of "privilege" not granted to minorities. The reality is, if you are genuinely interested in reaching those people who are most in the dark-and not just trying to shame them and thus elevate yourself, you need to approach and frame the issues in a decidely not-so-hostile, accusatory manner. I mean, how well has the current method been at affecting anything but closing minds?

ETA: I want to be clear, I do not dispute the validity of the terms or phrases I mentioned. I meant that in the context of spreading awareness and sparking introspection, they seem decidely wrong-headed.
The problem is that, while you can go a little ways with discussing thing by just discussing the concepts rather than the terms, it's extremely difficult to continue a discussion without naming the concept you are discussing.

I used to think I could discuss white privilege without using the term. And I can, at the most basic level--even if it gets tedious and long winded, which are bad for understanding in this slogan/buzzword culture. But I lose the ability to discuss it as it increases.

That said, I do object to "if you are white you are racist," but on conceptual grounds. If you mean "racist" the way it is normally used, then it is false. If you mean it in the "everyone is a little bit racist" way, then it's true, but unfairly singles out white people.

I am against any attempt to redefine white so that the KKK slogan "anti-racist means anti-white" is true. I'm against anything that seems hypocritical, where inserting black where you use white would be considered racist.

But I think we have to use these terms. The best we can do is mention what they mean, then say there is a term for that, and be clear that it doesn't mean what they think it means.
  #134  
Old 10-01-2018, 07:54 PM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Continental Divide
Posts: 5,420
It would help if people understood the difference between Implicit Bias, Explicit bias and Racism though.

But to be honest neither side (conservative/liberal) seems to be interested in that. When some minorities try to explain I have seen them shouted down by both sides.

Last edited by rat avatar; 10-01-2018 at 07:55 PM.
  #135  
Old 10-01-2018, 09:50 PM
Mr. Nylock is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Bed
Posts: 3,093
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
No I'm not interested in such a debate. I'm pretty sure it's going to boil down to the definition of expert, because, with mine, it seems so utterly obvious there are experts. There are people who study racism and have made it their life's work. And there is a fairly broad agreement on what is and isn't racism--the debates are in the nuances.
Alright, I can get on board with that. Give me three names of experts then and tell me what specific credential separates them from non-expert.

Quote:
As for the rest, we're talking past each other so much and have gone so far afield that I think we'd just be going further off the road to keep on.

Since I have so thoroughly misunderstood you, I will ask you the most basic of questions: what is your answer to the OP?
My answer to the OP is yes and no. As an example to illustrate my opinion I will give you
the redskins name controversy. Given your proclivity to rely on experts, you may not find this example palatable given that the studies only assess the feelings of your average person of Native American descent and do not rely on the opinions of people who have spent an undetermined as of yet years using scientific analysis to draw a conclusion as to whether something is offensive or not.


Quote:
Mine is basically "no." At least, among those who are actually anti-racist, there is very little use of "racist" to try and shut down debates. And, rather than the word being watered down, it is being artificially limited, because people get too insulted by even suggesting the idea that something might be racist.
The biggest problem I have with this is when one can no longer separate the individual and the race. I believe this perpetuates a new type of racism, and, although often well meaning erects new barriers more than it breaks down old ones.

Quote:
I do, however, see a small but worrying tendency of people being called racist for saying anti-racist things. I recently saw a video making fun of racist remarks made towards her. And she was called a racist for making fun of them.
This happens also. Lots of things happen, people do get called racist for saying anti-racist things, people get called racist for things many minorities would not call racist, sometimes racism doesn't get called out when it should. I believe all of these things exist in society, this is not a zero-sum game.

Quote:
And here's my second question: what relevance does your second post have? What are you saying about the topic of the thread? I clearly misunderstood your point, so could you make it more clear?
I'm not really sure what the relevance of anything I say has. My point is that I work with people who have been to college, I work with people who have been to jail, some are from the worst backgrounds you can imagine, numerous religions, non religions and political perspectives. Many of us have various opinions on things but somehow, with all of this we are able to support each other and get along. So while these experts are coming from on high like moses with his tablets to formulate the unalienable truths of what is and is not racist and giving edicts on who to watch out for and who to hate and why, we are humbly going about our work and find a way to get along and listen to each other - and, perish the thought, sometimes understand even if we don't agree. None of us, however, have spent years studying racism, so our opinions are not really relevant to anything I suppose.
  #136  
Old 10-02-2018, 02:23 AM
Budget Player Cadet is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,722
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
"Paid for their Transgressions"? Right? Are you kidding? It said the punishments range from warnings to "community service". Oh yeah, that makes sense. Punish a student by forcing them to work for the same crazy liberal/progressive causes they already support!

But your right. I dont blame the students so much as the idiots in charge for allowing this.

Please, Please... if you find a site that actually shows how many students got off with just a warning (which I bet they laughed at), had to do "community service" at the leftist/progressive organization they themselves choose, and to how many were actually suspended - please post it.

Here is a good video of the 20 most outrageous things done at Evergreen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJ4mnQ2mV8Q

Everything from attacking staff members to demanding no homework!
Okay. Are these events at Evergreen State College exemplary of:
A) National politics as a whole
B) Universities as a whole
C) Evergreen State College as a whole
D) Specific events at evergreen state college?

SPOILER:
The answer is D.


Speaking of "attacking staff members", looking into these events at Evergreen led me to this article: Signal Boost: How Conservative Media Outlets Turn Faculty Viewpoints Into National News. It's an interesting piece documenting how the right-wing media takes relatively innocuous statements by liberal professors, morphs them into something far less innocuous, and makes them national news. For example, why is it national news when a college professor speaks up against Trump at a commencement speech? It isn't. It shouldn't be. There's nothing surprising or important there. But it feeds into this narrative of far-left colleges, and it's essentially a form of doxxing via signal-boosting. And when this happens, look at some of the consequences:
The repercussions: Ms. Taylor said she had received racist, sexist messages as well as death threats. In a statement on Facebook at the end of May, she announced that she was canceling her forthcoming public talks.

"The cancellation of my speaking events is a concession to the violent intimidation that was, in my opinion, provoked by Fox News," she said.

[...]

The repercussions: On Wednesday, facing what law-enforcement officers called "non-specific" threats, Trinity College temporarily shut down.

Mr. Williams said he also received threats by email and telephone. "This attack is at a level of vitriol and hatred in excess of what I have ever experienced," he said in his statement. "This seems to be a national drive of intimidation of professors which all colleges and universities should be concerned about."

[...]

The repercussions: Ms. Bond told The Chronicle that she had received death threats and hateful email messages. Her university supported her throughout the process, she said, but the episode gave her pause about bringing academic work to the public.
Again, this seems a far bigger problem than "PC gone wild" or a few dumb college students going a little too far.

And of course, you always see people reach to the usual suspects. Evergreen again? What, has there not been a single noteworthy outbreak of "PC gone mad" at a college since then? It seems to me like this is something that happens from time to time at Evergreen, and really not so much elsewhere. It has virtually no direct impact on national or even state politics. To the degree it has any impact at all, that impact is driven entirely by the right-wing backlash when the pipeline outlined in that article turns a minor local story into national news.

In the case of Evergreen, the nutjobs from all across the country turned out, leading to threats of massacre that force the school to temporarily shut down and a white supremacist rally at Evergreen. Students felt unsafe and threatened. They had to move their own graduation ceremony off campus because of this. From the article:
Online vigilantes from 4chan, Reddit and other forums swarmed to unearth Evergreen students’ contact information. They have harassed us with hundreds of phone calls, anonymous texts and terrifyingly specific threats of violence that show they know where we live and work.

After I published an essay on Medium to explain the protesters’ side of the story, my full name, phone number and home address were posted online, and I was bombarded with hate-filled messages. I found my name and personal information on message boards, along with rape threats and discussions about which racial slur fit me best (the consensus was the N-word). It took three days to get my personal information taken down, and for others it took longer.

In the past few weeks, the school has been shut down four times because of threats, including one from an anonymous caller who said, “I’m on my way to Evergreen University now with a .44 Magnum. I am gonna execute as many people on that campus as I can get a hold of.”
This seems substantially more significant than the initial student protests. And even more significant than that: politicians are using this as an excuse to go after higher education.
On May 31, State Representative Matt Manweller (political science professor at Central Washington University) submitted a “request for investigation” to the Washington State Human Rights Commission. He reiterated Weinstein’s assertion that he was subjected to race-based exclusion; the Commission chose not to take up the request. Manweller also sent a letter to Evergreen’s Director of Government Relations, stating, “Evergreen students are an embarrassment.” He called the college leadership cowardly and complicit, adding, “My colleagues and I have had enough of this ridiculous behavior fostered at our public institutions.” A few days later, with the support of 14 Republican representatives, he submitted House Bill 2221, proposing “transitioning The Evergreen State College to a private four-year institution of higher education.” Senator Fortunato introduced the companion Senate Bill 5946 to reduce state support for the college in a planned regression of funding over five years, culminating in a sale to a private party, echoing similar proposals from the 1970s and ’80s.
As in - because of the actions of these students and the distorted reporting on the right about what happened, politicians attempted to privatize Evergreen University. Again, this seems substantially more significant than the actual student protest.

This is why I talk about type 1 vs. type 2 errors. It's trivial to point out that accusations of racism are abused in some cases; hell, it's happened to me personally. It's not trivial to say that it's an endemic problem, and it's flat-out wrong to say that it's a more common problem than accusations of racism and bigotry being taken out of context and used as a cudgel to beat the left.

Last edited by Budget Player Cadet; 10-02-2018 at 02:24 AM.
  #137  
Old 10-02-2018, 07:53 AM
JKellyMap's Avatar
JKellyMap is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 9,885
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gyrate View Post
"Minds closing" at the use of the term "white fragility" is pretty much the fucking definition of "white fragility".
Exactly! DA’s post couldn’t have been more “meta” — more self-referential — if he had tried. It reminds me of the old paradox “This is not a sentence.”

Last edited by JKellyMap; 10-02-2018 at 07:54 AM.
  #138  
Old 10-02-2018, 07:58 AM
JKellyMap's Avatar
JKellyMap is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 9,885
Sorry — here’s DA’s original post, so you don’t have to hunt for it:

“i think that the terms white privilege and white fragility could not have been better designed to close minds. At least with "white privilege" it sort of tracks what the term is trying convey. White fragility OTOH is not very descriptive of the sort of racial defensiveness that some white people have when discussing race.”
  #139  
Old 10-02-2018, 10:21 AM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,676
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
Everything from attacking staff members to demanding no homework!
Holy fucking shit! Students demanded no homework? Why didn't you mention this before? It's clearly the beginning of the path downward to anarchy.

  #140  
Old 10-02-2018, 02:45 PM
Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 7,980
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet View Post
Okay. Are these events at Evergreen State College exemplary of:
A) National politics as a whole
B) Universities as a whole
C) Evergreen State College as a whole
D) Specific events at evergreen state college?

SPOILER:
The answer is D.
Actually I think a better answer would be "All of the Above" since for example
A - look at republicans or members of the Trump administration getting kicked out of restaurants and vilified by the MSM as being radical right wingers.
B. Ok try this. Walk thru any university with a MAGA hat on and just see how it goes over. You will be yelled at, spat on, threatened, etc... You would be blind not to see how crazy the left is on college campuses.
Then go a day wearing a Hillary hat and see how your treated?
C. Ok, on that one I dont know that college but it seems like its been a sort of leftwing radical college for a long time and maybe, this time they just went over the line. And the thing is ALL STUDENTS and ALUMNI, should be concerned about how their college is run and portrayed. Students from Evergreen will graduate, apply for a job and well... if the hiring person thinks Evergreen students are bunch of radical idiots they might hire someone from another school.
D. I'm not sure specifically but the thing is, videos DONT LIE. Teachers and staff were attacked, their ONLY CRIME IS THEY WERE WHITE. The campus police were not allowed to protect them and this is why the head of campus safety quit her job.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet View Post
As in - because of the actions of these students and the distorted reporting on the right about what happened, politicians attempted to privatize Evergreen University. Again, this seems substantially more significant than the actual student protest.
Well you know what, again, pictures dont lie. The campus was total chaos. NO LEARNING was taking place. Watch the damn video and see the students demanding that they not be held accountable for homework and projects.

And yes, the college administration should have been taken to task for letting this get out of hand. NO WAY should staff members been allowed to be threatened like that. WATCH THE VIDEO! The college president looked like a spineless weenie. Did you listen to him? He admitted he was racist. He said his staff were racist and would go thru training. He basically admitted every wacko demand the students had were right on and he was going to do whatever they asked. The man was a wimp and doesnt deserve his taxpayer funded job.

And NOW they come out with this BS statement about how 80 students were punished??? By making them work for whatever liberal/progressive group they want? I'm not saying all 80 but frankly many more would have been suspended and not allowed to return without admitting fault, having a parent or guardian, and apologized for threatening staff and disrupting the school.
Also I would post signs all around campus informing students this was a UNIVERSITY. NOT a free for all and their were rules and consequences.
Should that college get reprimanded and even lose state funding? Well that is taxpayer money isnt it? Dont ALL the taxpayers in the state deserve a say so on how their tax money is spent? This is why tax money doesnt go to private, religious based schools.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet View Post
This is why I talk about type 1 vs. type 2 errors. It's trivial to point out that accusations of racism are abused in some cases; hell, it's happened to me personally. It's not trivial to say that it's an endemic problem, and it's flat-out wrong to say that it's a more common problem than accusations of racism and bigotry being taken out of context and used as a cudgel to beat the left.
So what will be the response from the left? This problem is not going away.



Please tell me.
What should be done to students who do these acts?

Should college administrations allow them when they know its being videoed and will soon be on computer screens all over the world?
As for me, the viewer, what should I do?
Ignore them?
Blow them off as right wing propaganda?
What criteria should I use when judging an incident?

Now have there been similar incidents at other colleges this year? I dont know but the thing is video cameras are everywhere. Alternate news sites are everywhere. Where once college students could do about whatever they want and it wouldnt get out other than local news, now with the power of cameras and the web, it does make the national news. Its a new world for the left and they better deal with it.
  #141  
Old 10-02-2018, 02:49 PM
Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 7,980
Quote:
Originally Posted by manson1972 View Post
Holy fucking shit! Students demanded no homework? Why didn't you mention this before? It's clearly the beginning of the path downward to anarchy.

What I wonder is how many students were let out of tests and assignments because well... they demanded it? It doesnt look like much learning was taking place at that school.

"Sorry I couldnt do my homework, I was busy attacking white staff members".
  #142  
Old 10-02-2018, 02:51 PM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Continental Divide
Posts: 5,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by JKellyMap View Post
Sorry — here’s DA’s original post, so you don’t have to hunt for it:

“i think that the terms white privilege and white fragility could not have been better designed to close minds. At least with "white privilege" it sort of tracks what the term is trying convey. White fragility OTOH is not very descriptive of the sort of racial defensiveness that some white people have when discussing race.”
In an attempt to move these discussions forward I want to expand on this.

Cognitive dissonance or the mental discomfort of finding out a fact that you were not aware of and provides a conflict with two beliefs or moral views is not uncommon.

Privilege is NOT AN INSULT but call feel like one or yes sometimes used as one, just as the term ignorance is. We are not omniscient, we simply are mostly ignorant, and privilege is one example as a case where that is often true.

Unless you believe you are some type of omniscient god to not take insult to someone pointing out that there are ideas and information that you may just not have experienced. And check your pride when you assume that you some how know how someone else feels.

Fragility is also a pretty good term for what happens with 'white fragility' or in other types. Where a person, even due to no fault of their own, have no possibility of knowing some information but also lack the ability to talk about the subject.

Both of these terms even if they are used as an insult do not need to be taken as an insult. If you want to de-weaponize them you have a choice to do so by just refusing to view them as an insult and address the topic at hand.

The crux is if you just ignore it or show it down with irrelevant counter examples you are not addressing it. And yes people will get pissed off and frustrated by this and to be honest even if you simply ignore it you are adding to the problem.

When a person says "Political candidate X is causing problem Y" returning with "Well political candidate A also caused problem Y or problem Z two decades ago" does nothing to solve problem Y.

People are justifiably frustrated with problem Y never being honestly discussed and problem Y will never be solved. As the discussion is about problem Y and not problem Z it is not useful to focus on problem Z at the same time even if it is important.

If you are concerned that the terms white privilege and white fragility are weaponized you have the power to disarm them. You can do so by simply choosing to not taking it personally, not trying to shift the blame, and staying on topic.

If someone said "I think you are stepping on my foot" you do not solve that problem by saying that "well Bill Clinton stepped on this other persons foot" you simply look at your own foot and see if it is true.

If you practice this a few times and work through the discomfort it will become painfully obvious how childish and unnecessary your previous response was.

Yes there will still be sexists, racists and bigots on all sides, but eradicating all of them is not in scope at all.
  #143  
Old 10-02-2018, 02:54 PM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Continental Divide
Posts: 5,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
What I wonder is how many students were let out of tests and assignments because well... they demanded it? It doesnt look like much learning was taking place at that school.

"Sorry I couldnt do my homework, I was busy attacking white staff members".
This is a misdirection, and the only people who are still stewing about this are people who are trying to use it as a proxy for ad hominem attack related to national politics.

You do realize you are talking about a private collage that is famous for not having grades BTW?
  #144  
Old 10-02-2018, 02:59 PM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,676
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
What I wonder is how many students were let out of tests and assignments because well... they demanded it? It doesnt look like much learning was taking place at that school.

"Sorry I couldnt do my homework, I was busy attacking white staff members".
Yeah, I wonder. Got any idea?
  #145  
Old 10-02-2018, 03:03 PM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Continental Divide
Posts: 5,420
Focusing on a small college with an enrollment smaller than most school districts which has been declining for years, which accepts 95% of applicants and has no grades, no departments, and no majors as the only example for months of outrage shows the argument is pretty weak anyway.

It is merely a special case to justify the mythology of terrified white men.

Last edited by rat avatar; 10-02-2018 at 03:04 PM.
  #146  
Old 10-02-2018, 03:10 PM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Continental Divide
Posts: 5,420
To fight ignorance, and to also show that men don't need to be afraid of admitting being wrong.

Evergreen is a publicly funded college, just not part of our state University system, so I was wrong but that doesn't change majority of my point.

Wow, somehow doing the right thing wasn't painful...
  #147  
Old 10-02-2018, 03:40 PM
Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 7,980
Quote:
Originally Posted by rat avatar View Post
Focusing on a small college with an enrollment smaller than most school districts which has been declining for years, which accepts 95% of applicants and has no grades, no departments, and no majors as the only example for months of outrage shows the argument is pretty weak anyway.

It is merely a special case to justify the mythology of terrified white men.
I'm not terrified.

You can call me ignorant but I thought the term "College" meant real learning like grades, tests, papers, all nighters getting ready for finals, sweating thru tests, taking good notes, etc... My college, the University of Kansas, had all those and they did kick students out who didnt make grades.

Your right, I expected a little more from a place called a "college". And your right, this level of stupidity is rare at REAL universities and I should not focus on it.

Why would any real student who desires to work hard in an academically challenging environment leading to a respected degree waste their time and money there?
  #148  
Old 10-02-2018, 03:44 PM
Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 7,980
Quote:
Originally Posted by rat avatar View Post
This is a misdirection, and the only people who are still stewing about this are people who are trying to use it as a proxy for ad hominem attack related to national politics.

You do realize you are talking about a private collage that is famous for not having grades BTW?
No I wasn't. Sorry I wont bring up Evergreen again.

BTW, if they dont have grades, then how do they make sure the students learn?
  #149  
Old 10-02-2018, 03:44 PM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,676
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
Why would any real student who desires to work hard in an academically challenging environment leading to a respected degree waste their time and money there?
Isn't it obvious? They get to yell and scream at white teachers and protest the assignment of homework while having ignorant Americans think they represent the entire base of Liberal thought and/or the Democratic Party.
  #150  
Old 10-02-2018, 03:46 PM
Chingon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: the hypersphere
Posts: 735
I see that KU education is spectacular.
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 06:39 AM.

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 © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017