You’re unfamiliar with the idea of a topic sentence, I see. It’s where you tell what your topic will be, and then you support it. Reality is not altered by my summarizing your post; rather, I explained in detail why you’re full of shit. But if it allows you to claim victory to focus on the single word rather than on the arguments and facts supporting its claim, I’m sure that’s what you’ll do.
I think we should seek a happy medium, one which supports a sense of empowerment and equality for both men and women but also mentions breasts. I’m gonna go with “Together, we can make motorboat noises”.
I was going to post a serious response to the video but then I remembered that Nina Paley (a woman) already did one - 17 years ago.
Also, those guys remind me of the guy in this song (ignore the stupid pictures).
Years and years ago I was at a free outdoor concert for some local charity event. Lots of local bands were on the bill, mostly folk, but some rock, and punk as well.
One of the folk bands had a song, and the chorus was something like:
“I don’t care who you are or where you’re from, if you’re a white man, you’re a criminal”.
The gist of the song was that all white males are criminal oppressors.
As a white male I wasn’t too impressed with being generically branded as a criminal oppressor, so I share your sentiment.
(The folk band was comprised of white females, for what it’s worth.)
((Alas, that particular chorus was pretty catchy too. It was like funky folk reggae, and I’ve still got it stuck in my head after all these years.))
If I may play Stoid’s Advocate for a moment:
White men live in a world were they still directly benefit from the oppression that was caused in the past. That a specific man now says, “I didn’t personally do anything to oppress anyone, therefore I have nothing to apologize for.” he’s only partially right.
Perhaps Bernie Madoff’s wife wasn’t personally responsible for the Ponzi scheme, so then it wouldn’t bother you if she still kept the money.
… and the solution to historical inequities is, of course, to apologize a lot, and to put women up on a pedestal as earth mother goddesses to be worshipped. Because that helps.
Oh wait, it doesn’t help at all - it merely reenforces the harmful stereotypes of gender difference that created the very historical oppression these men are apologizing for, simply reversing the spin put on it.
It’s about as useful as “apologizing” for the history of racism in America by going around saying that Blacks are really these superior beings, who are more “primal” and “powerful” and “natural” than Whites, so we White folks should all worship their “animal energy”. Would that not seriously creep out any actual Black people reading it, as being simply racist bullshit repackaged to look like candy?
Whoa, hey. I didn’t offer a solution. The rich don’t need to apologize for it, but for them to say we’re equal is laughable. The consensus the Dope seems to be making (taken from the last 8 pages) is that the duty to address the inequality ends with how they personally treat the oppressed, while quietly still enjoying the fruits of it.
If you claim there is a “duty” that goes beyond how we “personally treat the oppressed”, then you sort of have an obligation to specify what this additional “duty” consists of.
Persumably you don’t agree that it consists of apologizing and putting the “oppressed” on a pedestal, like the OP link. So what does it consist of?
Wow. Just wow.
It took me three times to get half way though that before I gave up.
Stoid, that is creepy beyond words. And laughably lame. How in the world does this resonate with you? And stop the backpedalling that you only like the message and recognize that the delivery is lame. You fell for it hook, line and sinker:
When 99% of the people are telling you something is sanctimonious crap, you should at least consider it. Sometimes it’s best to admit you’re wrong and move on, instead of trying to defend the indefensible.
There were times my forefathers were the oppressed, and times they were the oppressors. But even if I could get their prodigy in a room to apologize, why would I care? Why would I need the sympathy of those who did me no wrong? I wouldn’t give a flying crap about them stroking me. Especially by a video as lame and creepy as this one.
In all sincerity, you should try to discover what it is in your own personal history or psyche that makes you crave this type of condescending pat on the head, especially one as lame and fake as this.
Supporting Affirmative Action, job training programs for minorities and the poor, higher taxes for the wealthy, Capitol Gains taxes, higher Estate Taxes and such…
But that’s all really beside the point I’m trying to make.
So I’ll ask again. If it was proven that Bernie Madoff’s wife had no knowledge of illegal activity would you be ok with her keeping the money Madoff stole. *
-
- lets ignore the legality of it here and focus on the morality of indirectly benefiting from someone elses ill gotten gains.
How, exactly? I haven’t gotten my Platinum Club Card yet for being a white guy, and as far as I know I’m at a disadvantage to any other equally-qualified “minority” at every turn. The “benefit” seems to be that I’ve gotten to hear a lot of shit since birth about how guilty I should feel for my white maleness. Yay.
Absolutely I wouldn’t be okay with it–and the point that men benefit from a history of sexism is a very valid point, one I agree with. I support affirmative action programs. (Actually, it’s a little weird: as a man, I benefited from a gender-based affirmative action program, getting a $1000 signing bonus when I agreed to teach in a low-income elementary school).
But an apology isn’t part of that. And pointing out that there’s a history of sexism in the world that needs to be addressed doesn’t have anything to do with the problems with this video. The video puts the history of sexism forward as one of communal guilt, not communal benefit. And I apologize for things I’m guilty of, not things I benefit from.
Ben and Mary are siblings. Their mom likes Ben better than Mary, so she buys Ben an ice cream, unfairly not giving any to Mary. Which of these things should Ben do?
- Say, “I’m sorry, Mary, that we were unfair to you.”
- Share his ice cream with Mary.
I’m all about #2, but #1 is nonsensical.
So, if you are broadly speaking a supporter of left wing social programs and progressive taxation, you are off the hook?
Seems to me that “current situations” are a far better reason to support such things than some theory of correcting historical inequities … but put it to the test:
Would, in your system, White guys who were destitute be equally eligible for social support as Black women, exactly as destitute? In short, is it a “means test” or an “ancestral responsibility test”?
It’s not a particularly compelling analogy, given that not all White guys have piles of ill-gotten gains from social inequities in the past.
How about this for an analogy: Bernie Madoff’s grandkids end up on the dole right beside the grandkids of his victims. Turn them away, or treat them the same?
I’m not advocating a male self-flagellating pity party. And you were born with the Platinum Club Card on your face.
And I really won’t allow you to get away with saying being white has no benefit.
This is interesting. If they’re both on the dole, I’m happy to treat them the same. However, if Madoff Jr. is a layabout millionaire based on his inheritance, and Paris Hilton is a layabout millionaire based on her inheritance, and Madoff-Victim Jr. is on the dole, I admit I see a pretty good reason to redistribute Madoff Jr’s wealth to Victim Jr. before I start looking at Paris Hilton’s wealth.
Exactly how many White guys have a serious inheritance from people who actually and directly benefitted in a financial sense from social inequities? Whose fortunes were, so to speak, based on slavery, for example?
The vast majority of White guys have no inheritance at all, just like the vast majority of white women, and the vast majority of non-white people of either sex.
How long did it take you guys to realize that video was awful and turn it off? For me it was the first 3 notes of music and one look at the guy on the right.
A ‘means test’ brought about by a historical inequality. But yeah, in the future if say the African American community disproportionately fills the best schools in the country then yeah, the social programs should swing the other way. But again, still not relevant to the point I was making and incredibly off topic from the OP.
If you don’t think white males currently still have an advantage in life that was created by an ‘ill-gotten system’ in the past we have nothing to talk about.
Based on slavery? Not so many. But my parents grew up under Jim Crow and involuntarily benefited from its restrictions on where black people could work, what money black people could earn, and the like. Police protection is far better in my town in the white neighborhoods than in the black neighborhoods. My students from black families are much likelier to be growing up in poverty, with all the educational problems that entails, than my white students.
Acknowledging the practical benefits of whiteness doesn’t mean feeling guilt for them. Most of those benefits are involuntary. But they’re there.
Contrast these two exercises: the benefits of being male and the benefits of being white. AFAICT, the first one is much weaker than the second, for a couple of reasons:
- Inequities continue through generations much more when the inequity is race-based, since they apply only to particular families and they affect the upbringing of the next generation in terms of material wealth and education and similar factors. Gender-based inequities apply to most families, meaning that once they’re fixed, they have few effects on the next generation.
- When I read the race-based list, I agreed with a majority of the statements. When I read the gender-based list, there were relatively few that applied to me.
Again, in no way am I saying that there’s no sexism now, nor am I saying that anti-male sexism is causing just as much harm in the real world as anti-female sexism is. Anti-male sexism, like in this video, is just stupid and annoying and occasionally causes isolated problems, whereas anti-female sexism causes a whole shitload of institutionalized problems.
But I am saying that there’s no collective guilt, not even from people that involuntarily benefit from sexist institutions, because that idea is incoherent.
I agree there is nothing to apologize for, what I disagree with is the notion (expressed many times in the last 8 pages) ‘I’ve never oppressed anyone so I’m not part of the equation.’
No, it is exactly on topic - that you brought up. That the OP can be in a way “defended”.
Sure, there are historical inequities that have carry-over effects - such as (for example) that a disproprtionate number of Black people are destitute as opposed to wealthy.
The response to that is to do practical things about the destitute, etc. based on progressive taxation, which will, of course, disproprtionaly benefit Black people. Not to simply assert, without any evidence whatsoever, that white people are comparable to Bernie Madoff’s wife, and thus subject to some sort of guilt - which does no good to anyone.