If you go back, you’ll see that I chose my words carefully.
**
I’m assuming catsix is offended because she thinks the above comment applies to her, that is, she admits she’s actively choosing to ignore reality. It would be easy for anyone to come to this conclusion. I have given her a list of innocuous, easily-taken-for-granted things that are bestowed to anyone who belongs to the majority, and yet she dismisses them without the clearest indication of why. Now she wants statistics to back up the claim that whites are privileged. To me, this is akin to not only denying that racism has ever existed, but also ignoring the fact that it’s simply easier being in the in-group than the out-group (or did we learn nothing from middle school?). To me, she’s either being intentionally obtuse or willfully blind.
But if my comments are to blame for her inability to intelligently participate on this forum, then I will retract them.
I’m at work, so these are just the cites that I have sitting on my hard drive here. Discrimination happens. It happens systematically. Putting your fingers in your ears and yelling “I don’t see any discrimination!” at the top of you voice does not make it true.
You said that if I refuse to admit that I’m privileged by being white, I’m either stupid or blind.
Well, I don’t have any privilege, ok? And I’m not stupid. I’m not blind either. But I am NOT privileged.
I also never said that discrimination doesn’t happen. But I did assert that because it happens in one direction, that does NOT make it OK to apply it in another direction.
I said I opposed AA because ‘two wrongs don’t make a right’, not because ‘there is no more racism’, but you guys obviously decided to attribute some other statements to me, so what the hell right?
No matter what I say, you’re going to insist I said something else.
I oppose AA because discrimination in one direction cannot be fixed by discrimination in another direction. I despise racism whether it comes from white people, black people, Asian people, green people or purple people.
And that includes blanket statements like suggesting that everyone who is white has some sort of privilege by birth. Generalisations made about white people are no more excusable than those made about black people.
It’s my impression that the main benefactor of Affirmative Action is the society at large. I don’t think it’s the perfect solution, but it’s several centuries too late for that.
Don’t have any statistics, but I have a story: Some 10 or 12 years ago, I applied for admission to a PhD program on the west coast, a good school with a program exactly suited to my future plans. I was turned down, though I had excellent undergrad grades and perfect grades through my MA program, adequate recommendations and one minor publication. (And I was white! The nerve of them liberals!) I wrote to the department chair to ask what I could do to improve my chances if I were to reapply, and he wrote me back. His answer was that in part I was the victim of numbers (250 applicants, 10 openings), but that in part I was also the victim of the school’s goals concerning “ethnic and gender balances.” He did not recommend that I reapply.
Of course, it hurt my feelings. I felt that my career, or what I thought was going to be my career, was being taken away from me. But even then, when it had just happened, I was able to see the situation from a larger cultural and historical perspective. As much as I hate to admit it, it isn’t all about me, or anyone else in particular. It’s more about the abstraction we call “us.” From that larger perspective, I don’t think it was wrong to choose someone else.
I wanted that professorship that I might have got. But I also want to live in a society educated by professors who are not all white males. I also want the society to be educated by men and women who represent various other cultures. There just aren’t enough of those professorships to go around. If I want to see a minority in one of those positions, that means I need to consider not occupying one of those positions myself. I want to live in a more open-minded world, and it ain’t gonna happen if all the university professors (or doctors, or lawyers, or politicians, or whatever desirable position you prefer) look like me.
I’ve got a good enough job and a good enough life. It’s okay with me if a minority member does better in life than I do. I do believe that it will help make the world a better place in general. I’m not afraid that “they” are going to take over the world, and I’m not so worried about what would happen if “they” did.
We have to see the bigger picture. The people who make those policies are not thinking, “How can we make sure that the smug little white kid doesn’t get the career he’s dreaming of.” They’re thinking about the society as a whole, or they should be.
Affirmative Action isn’t a perfect idea, and 30 years of compensation isn’t going to undo 400 years of damage. But what else can we do, while we wait for social attitudes to catch up with legislation? Maybe we should say seriously what Randy Newman said satirically: “You got to roll with the punches, little black boy. Just got to roll with 'em.” I think we’ve been saying that for too long.
We all have to roll with the punches sometimes. Does anyone really think that white people in general have rolled with as many as other “races” (a dangerous word, I know)? Why does it bother some white folks so much to see black folks doing okay?
And where in those links does it statistically prove that white people are all privileged?
It’s not like when you’re white, you get to go to whatever college you want and live in whatever apartment you want and have whatever job you want just because other people see the color of your skin and automatically hand things to you.
Like the bitterness that was displayed about all the white students at the college, that they’re having it handed to them on a silver platter by Mommy and Daddy. Or like they got in because they were white, so that means that the admissions board would never send them a rejection letter. Or that if a black applicant got a rejection letter it was because they were black and for no other reason.
Which is extremely odd to me, because I never put my race on my college applications. What’s been implied here is that if a black person doesn’t get a seat in a college, or a job that they want, or an apartment or a house that they want, it’s because they’re black.
There also seems to be the assumption that if the number of whites vs. blacks in a particular field is high, that means conclusively that there’s some sort of racist discrimination at work. That if there are 95% white people in an apartment building, and a black applicant got denied, it’s because the landlord is racist. Nobody left any room in that hypothetical for the possibility that the applicant in question had bad references, no credit history or failed a credit check. No, the assumption was, if a black person got turned down, the landlord was racist.
And what’s a landlord supposed to do if 95 out of every 100 applicants for an apartment in his building are white? Is he a racist because he gets more applications from white people than black people?
Another big reason I oppose AA is because I believe that equality of opportunity is the goal we should be reaching for, and that trying to legally mandate equality of outcome is a poor choice. If everyone who wants to try to become an engineer gets the chance to try, then we’re doing well. If not, we need to work harder to make sure everyone gets that opportunity. But not everyone who tries is going to make it, and we shouldn’t be saying ‘OK, if you want to be an engineer then you can be.’
Everyone should be able to try for that goal if that’s what he or she wants to do, but it’s just not feasible to say that everyone who wants to is going to make it. I do believe that if everyone who wants to try is given the opportunity to, those who have the ability and the drive will make it - and race and gender are not going to affect that in any way.
I believe that African-Americans are the largest beneficiary of AA in higher education, which is of course the area under discussion. At the very least, I’ve not heard of any preferential admissions programs for women, and certainly nothing like the tremendous disparities outlined above.
Secondly, you presume that we are better able to “interact with others who are different from us” just because one of the interactees happens to have black (or brown, or yellow, or whatever) skin. But like I’ve said, I really doubt that a bunch of upper middle class white kids are going to learn a whole lot about that from interacting with some upper middle class black kids. If you want real differences, target kids from vastly different religious and national backgrounds. Your argument is just a slightly restated version of the typical argument for diversity I outlined above.
Maybe that’s a mischaracterization, and there are those of us white people who are not the least bit bothered by seeing black people do well, but still don’t like AA?
Because if there were 250 applicants for 10 seats, I’d hope that the best 10 were selected and that what color they were wasn’t one of the deciding factors?
It’s perfectly OK with me that there are people who do better in life than I do. I’ll never be as successful as Condi Rice or Sidney Poitier or the guy who just built the first hotel in my hometown. I’m never going to be on a level of Dr. Jae Oh (professor of computer science) or Dr. Bartholomew Nnaji (professsor of industrial engineering) or Dr. Elayne Arrington (senior lecturer). I’m not as talented as they are, so I don’t hold any ill feelings toward their success. They earned it.
I just want to see a world where people get what they earn and everybody has the opportunity to grow from their present position. Whether they take that opportunity and use it or waste it is now and always will be entirely up to them.
That’s why I want equality of opportunity and not equality of outcome. One is fair, and the other is artificial discrimination.
And on preview I see that minty green is now suggesting I called myself a martyr. :rolleyes:
Those links show that minorities have a measureable and distinct disadvantage in relation to whites. And, as I said before, the privilege you have personally received is that you personally do not have to face these obstacles.
Fact: Blacks get inferior healthcare regardless of their ability to pay.
Fact: Blacks get arrested more, are convicted at a higher rate and receive much harsher sentences for the same crimes.
Fact: Minorities and minorities neighborhoods are targeted for subprime, impossible to pay off mortgages that are particularly devistating to minority communities.
Couple this (and other discriminatory practices) with the perception that minorities --blacks especially-- are somehow racially more apt to be stupid, criminals and untrustworthy and there you have it. My conclusion that you catsix, yes you personally have lived a more privileged life than black people.
Prove to you that I personally did not sit around soaking up privilege just because of the color of my skin?
I think not.
I’ve already worked very, very hard to prove to a lot of people that I belong where I do and deserve the things I have. I don’t count you among those who I have to prove these things to.
This is the equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears and shouting “I can’t hear you!”
No one is saying that you did not work hard to get where you are. No one is saying that you didn’t struggle and face hardships. But there are real, measurable advantages to being white whether you have your fingers in your ears or not.
Who here has said ALL (insert color) people are anything? We aren’t talking about individuals. We’re talking about groups. And as a group, catsix, whites have historically fared better than blacks. Many reasons explain this, but the biggest, most important one, hinges on racism and power. If these two elements were important back in the 60s when it was still legal to discriminate against blacks and keep them from participating as full citizens, then they still are important today. Do you deny this?
**
Do you think that’s what privileged means? Having everything handed to you? Have you not been reading my posts?
Do you think black people can get into any college and rent any apartment and live whereever they want? Compared to whites, do you think they have it easier in these areas? If your answer is no, then you will be admitting that whites–generally speaking–are PRIVILEGED. If you say yes, then you aren’t aware of reality.
**
He realized the error of his comment and apologized. Get over it.
**
I wish you would extract these comments from people’s posts, because I haven’t read anything here that would indicate that anyone believes these things to be true.
**
What is odd to you? That someone would see you as a white person even though you choose not to identify yourself that way on paper? That’s not odd to me. That just seems like another benefit of belonging to the majority and not having to worry that your identity will negatively stigmatize you.
I’d be curious to know if you “hide” your gender as well.
**
Where is this being implied? Please post the statements which contain these implications so that we can dissect them together.
Since you’re talking about hypotheticals, I’ll give you a real example of rental discrimination. Back in the 70s, my father was looking for an apartment to rent and he found an ad in the paper. He calls the landlord and she happily welcomes him over to check out the place. He shows up and the lady gives him a look over and frowns.
“Are you colored, young man?” she asks him (because my father is light-skinned and it’s hard to tell what he “is” sometimes).
“Yes, ma’am,” my father replies and he knows what’s coming.
“I’m sorry,” the lady says. “But I can’t have a colored man living in my house.”
In this example, there was no ambiquity, no room for second guessing or rationalization. It was clear that my father was discriminated against because he was black and because the white woman felt negatively about this. Very few white people are flat-out rejected like this.
True, there’s no guarentee that a black landlord would have been any different with a white renter, but when there are more white landlords than black (and there are), white renters are clearly more privileged than blacks. Why can’t you see this, catsix?
**
You are missing the point. If you are a white applicant for an apartment in this hypothetical and you get rejected, then you can be rest assured that your race had nothing to do with the rejection. However, if you are black you can’t be so sure. This does not mean other factors did not come into play; it just means that race could be one of them. Whites are privileged in that they don’t have to worry about this. What are you are not getting here?
Who here has said ALL (insert color) people are anything? We aren’t talking about individuals. We’re talking about groups. And as a group, catsix, whites have historically fared better than blacks. Many reasons explain this, but the biggest, most important one, hinges on racism and power. If these two elements were important back in the 60s when it was still legal to discriminate against blacks and keep them from participating as full citizens, then they still are important today. Do you deny this?
**
Do you think that’s what privileged means? Having everything handed to you? Have you not been reading my posts?
Do you think black people can get into any college and rent any apartment and live whereever they want? Compared to whites, do you think they have it easier in these areas? If your answer is no, then you will be admitting that whites–generally speaking–are PRIVILEGED. If you say yes, then you aren’t aware of reality.
**
He realized the error of his comment and apologized. Get over it.
**
I wish you would extract these comments from people’s posts, because I haven’t read anything here that would indicate that anyone believes these things to be true.
**
What is odd to you? That someone would see you as a white person even though you choose not to identify yourself that way on paper? That’s not odd to me. That just seems like another benefit of belonging to the majority and not having to worry that your identity will negatively stigmatize you.
I’d be curious to know if you “hide” your gender as well.
**
Where is this being implied? Please post the statements which contain these implications so that we can dissect them together.
Since you’re talking about hypotheticals, I’ll give you a real example of rental discrimination. Back in the 70s, my father was looking for an apartment to rent and he found an ad in the paper. He calls the landlord and she happily welcomes him over to check out the place. He shows up and the lady gives him a look over and frowns.
“Are you colored, young man?” she asks him (because my father is light-skinned and it’s hard to tell what he “is” sometimes).
“Yes, ma’am,” my father replies and he knows what’s coming.
“I’m sorry,” the lady says. “But I can’t have a colored man living in my house.”
In this example, there was no ambiquity, no room for second guessing or rationalization. It was clear that my father was discriminated against because he was black and because the white woman felt negatively about this. Very few white people are flat-out rejected like this.
True, there’s no guarentee that a black landlord would have been any different with a white renter, but when there are more white landlords than black (and there are), white renters are clearly more privileged than blacks. Why can’t you see this, catsix?
**
You are missing the point. If you are a white applicant for an apartment in this hypothetical and you get rejected, then you can be rest assured that your race had nothing to do with the rejection. However, if you are black you can’t be so sure. This does not mean other factors did not come into play; it just means that race could be one of them. Whites are privileged in that they don’t have to worry about this. What are you are not getting here?
Who here has said ALL (insert color) people are anything? We aren’t talking about individuals. We’re talking about groups. And as a group, catsix, whites have historically fared better than blacks. Many reasons explain this, but the biggest, most important one, hinges on racism and power. If these two elements were important back in the 60s when it was still legal to discriminate against blacks and keep them from participating as full citizens, then they still are important today. Do you deny this?
**
Do you think that’s what privileged means? Having everything handed to you? Have you not been reading my posts?
Do you think black people can get into any college and rent any apartment and live whereever they want? Compared to whites, do you think they have it easier in these areas? If your answer is no, then you will be admitting that whites–generally speaking–are PRIVILEGED. If you say yes, then you aren’t aware of reality.
**
He realized the error of his comment and apologized. Get over it.
**
I wish you would extract these comments from people’s posts, because I haven’t read anything here that would indicate that anyone believes these things to be true.
**
What is odd to you? That someone would see you as a white person even though you choose not to identify yourself that way on paper? That’s not odd to me. That just seems like another benefit of belonging to the majority and not having to worry that your identity will negatively stigmatize you.
I’d be curious to know if you “hide” your gender as well.
**
Where is this being implied? Please post the statements which contain these implications so that we can dissect them together.
Since you’re talking about hypotheticals, I’ll give you a real example of rental discrimination. Back in the 70s, my father was looking for an apartment to rent and he found an ad in the paper. He calls the landlord and she happily welcomes him over to check out the place. He shows up and the lady gives him a look over and frowns.
“Are you colored, young man?” she asks him (because my father is light-skinned and it’s hard to tell what he “is” sometimes).
“Yes, ma’am,” my father replies and he knows what’s coming.
“I’m sorry,” the lady says. “But I can’t have a colored man living in my house.”
In this example, there was no ambiquity, no room for second guessing or rationalization. It was clear that my father was discriminated against because he was black and because the white woman felt negatively about this. Very few white people are flat-out rejected like this.
True, there’s no guarentee that a black landlord would have been any different with a white renter, but when there are more white landlords than black (and there are), white renters are clearly more privileged than blacks. Why can’t you see this, catsix?
**
You are missing the point. If you are a white applicant for an apartment in this hypothetical and you get rejected, then you can be rest assured that your race had nothing to do with the rejection. However, if you are black you can’t be so sure. This does not mean other factors did not come into play; it just means that race could be one of them. Whites are privileged in that they don’t have to worry about this. What are you are not getting here?
I still say that if you guys want to claim I had any kind of advantage based on what color I am, you’re the ones with the burden to prove it.
You keep saying that there are ‘real measureable advantages to being white.’
Well?
What are they? And please do include the mesaurements. Because all you’ve given me so far is a bunch of numbers that don’t prove reasons for those numbers, a few anecdotes that are at least thirty years old, and a whole bunch of assumption and conjecture about how things ‘probably are’ or what people ‘don’t have to worry about.’
Well, let’s see. If you lived in my area, you would be able to work at the plant across from the Klu Klux Klan. You’d not have to plan your motorcycle rides to avoid entire counties. You wouldn’t have to counsel your children to avoid those same counties.
If you didn’t get a job, didn’t get the apartment, it was most likely to be because of the individual merits of your situation, not the tone of your skin.
If you got arrested for drug possession, you’d be much less likely to go to prison. ever been followed in a store? I’ve not been, but ask minority folks if they have been and you’d hear about it.
To the extent that you **don’t ** have to think consciously about which county you’re in, you’ve got an advantage over the minorities in my area
But then, all of this has been posted.
What you’re looking for apparently, is for one of us to be able to tell you - remember that job you got 2 years ago? well, there was a more qualified black applicant and you were selected instead 'cause you’re not black. We’re not able to do that. To the extent that you’ve not seen that either is more of an interesting comment than anything else.
This does not mean that you’ve not benefited from being a member of the majority group in the US. I asked before if you deny that racism exists in the US. If you agree that racism exists, then how can you not understand that you’ve benefited? Note that I’m not claiming that your life has been perfect. But, again to the extent that you don’t have to think about being questioned for sitting in front of your house (Colunsburys’ friend), don’t have to worry about traveling across a county line (my former boss and his kids), don’t have to look over your shoulder in the store, you’ve benefited.
If you don’t recognize that, there’s no way to demonstrate it to you. It’s like having to prove that the color red that I see is the same color red that you see.
Again, the concept that as a member of the majority group in this country that you have some distinct advantage over minorities in the same area, does not mean that you personally have had no adversity, that you personally have only had privileges etc. so please, no claims that I’ve told you that you’ve had it easy etc. thank you.
This is defeatism. When Lyndon Johnson began the Great Society, I believed that children could be made whole in ONE generation. Our goal was to provide the proper support, so that a baby born today would not have to be disadvantaged due to wrongs done to his forbears hundreds of years ago. To this end, we instituted educational programs, such as Head Start, affirmative action, school lunch, various supplementary reading classes, new math, SPSS, etc., etc. Also, welfare, public housing, food stamps, etc. helped provide adequate economic resources.
Let’s face it: these programs have not worked nearly as well as we thought they would. We expected to have eradicated poverty by now; instead we still have a substantial underclass.
Let’s figure out which of these programs aren’t working and replace them with better approaches. I’m not willing to write off more generations of Americans, while we wait for something good to happen. Effectiveness is the key.
Regarding effectiveness, I agree with Biggirl, monstro, et al that on average Blacks in America have a relative disadvantage, for all the reasons they listed. That’s not fair. Nevertheless, I believe that dwelling on the unfairness is not the most effective way to progress. In particular, pushing a student into an inappropriate college is apt to be more of a burden than a benefit.
On an earlier post, I mentioned a number of minority groups who now do better than average. A glaring exception is Native Americans. Their forebears were terribly mistreated several generations ago. But, that’s not why the reservations are miserable places today. Today’s problems stem from many decades ineffective government action by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, which has sapped initiative. Our policies should be based on the model of groups that have succeeded.
What I see going on here isn’t ‘dwelling on the unfairness’, it’s being called on to prove to people who will not admit that there is any unfairness, that it exists, and that it exists on a bigger level than Mr. Jones over there says bad things about minorities.
or have you been reading a different thread? BIgGirl & monstro have been called on to prove categorically, by numbers and relevant cites that a single individual posterhas benefited by virtue of being part of the majority, same poster who’s rejected cites regarding demographics from the DOJ etc.
I’d say ‘dwelling on the unfairness’ isn’t quite the words to use.
and, to the extent that this same argument goes on and on in real life as well, it’s too soon to say ‘well, you don’t need to prove that you’ve had disadvantages’. there’s plenty of catsix’s out there.
Because I’m telling you that if you can look at someone and tell by what color they are what level of privilege they’ve had in their life, then your deductive powers are far, far above mine.
Here’s exactly what my gripe is, and why I said that racism and prejudice are just as bad no matter who they’re applied against.
Instead of seeing people, you see ‘white people’. Because every argument against me has been ‘you can be sure because of the color of your skin that it wasn’t racism that affected you.’
And then I got told I was calling myself a martyr when I pointed out, ‘Hey, how can you say it’s never happened to me that I’ve been judged by what color I am. It’s happening right now.’
I’m not crying about it, and I’m not going to be all bitter. But there is a double standard here. You looked at me, and you saw a color (because I said what it was to illustrate a point) and you made assumptions. You don’t really know if they’re true or not, and I can’t prove that I did get hassled in my old neighborhood for being the wrong color and walking down the sidewalk or standing on the porch, but the thing is they were assumed.
Based on nothing other than what color I am.
And as for rejecting cites based on demographics, I’ve got good reason to not assume a basis behind numbers. Because I was one of 3 females graduating with a class of 30 in my field, and because a difference in numbers like that doesn’t mean inherent discrimination. If you can prove those numbers were definitely caused by discrimination, that’s one thing. But you can’t just throw out some numbers and say ‘these numbers exist because of discrimination therefore they are proof of discrimination.’
