How is he insulting you?
the subtle joke i didn’t (and still don’t) get
the whiny bitch part
The joke is that the very word “theory”, a technical term with a specific meaning, is abused, in the way Bosstone parodies it, by everyone from creationists to global warming denialists.
In this case, the term “whiny bitch” does not apply to everyone who has problems with the term “white privilege”, or even all of the group “White people”. Sure, the term might apply to you - if you’re someone who objects to Hispanic immigration into the US on the grounds that it is diluting the essential WASP-y nature of US culture, etc. I haven’t seen any evidence of such from you, so I was not addressing you specifically, but instead, that nebulous group. If you wish to claim membership of said group, go ahead, but understand that I was addressing the whole group, not you, as per established Dope protocol. Any assumption of the mantle of whiny bitchiness on your part is your inference, not my implication.
Creationists like to argue against the theory of evolution by going “If there was any truth to it, it would be more than a theory.” You see, they are using the layman meaning of theory which means something more like a hypothesis, while the scientific meaning of theory is much more well-defined and indicates an established compilation of evidence, substantiated hypotheses, and predictive models.
Therefore, calling it the theory of evolution is misleading to laymen, but nobody has ever suggested that maybe the scientific community should come up with a more appropriate term so people who’ve never heard it in that context before don’t get confused.
This, as I trust you can see, is analogous to the current debate, wherein “white privilege” has a fairly specific meaning that is not necessarily immediately obvious to people new to the concept, although it should be apparent when one takes time to reflect that it is referring to the privilege white people in general enjoy over people of color. The fact that individuals are not aware the group as a whole enjoys this privilege does not negate its existence, and in fact it is for this reason that the term was coined, to help provide it with some visibility in the social discussion.
MrDibble’s use of “whiny bitch” was not specifically directed at you or to anyone in this discussion, but to people involved in the discussions he gave examples of such as immigration debates, official language debates, etc.
Does that about clear it up?
yes, i know what a theory is. i even know what a premise is too. this is a message board, not a college paper…
You wanted it explained, I explained.
yeah but you are the one who brought up the term theory
it’s a word I vary rarely use, simply because it has two connotations
i think i’m going to bed man
if i was grumpy or rude i apologize
John Scalzi did an excellent post on this very thing…
You are making up that second connotation, whatever it is. I’ve never heard anyone but you think there is more than one connotation.
This thread is a timely one. On another message board, I’m currently involved in a discussion about colorism within the black community. And in that context, “privilege” applies to light-skinned blacks whose likeness to whites affords them advantages that darker hued blacks do not get.
I don’t understand why a sane, level-headed white person would find “white privilege” offensive. As a black person with light skin, I fully admit to being better treated than others. I don’t have to wait for someone else to tell me that this makes me privileged; my own two eyes have told me this already. It costs me nothing personally to acknowledge this reality. Acknowledging it is the least I can do.
If someone can’t even bring themselves to accept the “white privilege” label for what it is, then any pledges on their part to actually do something about the problem ring hollow to me. The tiny amount of pain and discomfort that comes with you acknowledging white privilege doesn’t compare at all to the pain and discomfort that comes with losing out to “black anti-privilege”. The average black person would love to have your plight if it meant they didn’t have to worry about racial prejudice everywhere they went.
The reason “white privilege” stings is because of guilt. Emotionally, you want to believe that you and the rest of your demographic is at the top because of merit, even though rationally, you know it’s not the case. Understand where your emotional reaction is coming from and then maybe you won’t let it affect your application of the English language. A rose by any other name is still a rose.
Certainly that’s one reason. However, the term and concept of privilege are sometimes misused as a way to stifle folks’ voices in discussions, as in my previous example. I think the concept and term are fantastic analytical tools when used precisely, but are obnoxious bullying tools when used incorrectly.
I’m sorry not all of us can be Mr. Spock immediately after 60 percent of a state demonstrates just how much it hates us by codifying hatred in their constitution.
Yeah, and me, I’m sorry some of y’all think it’s okay to be hateful toward gay folks in North Carolina just because there are some other hateful folks in North Carolina, and I’m sorry that you think some weak Mr. Spock joke excuses such poor behavior.
The amendment was terrible. It doesn’t excuse calling my gay friends in NC soulless.
Being gay and/or voting against anti-marriage equality amendments are implied exceptions to soulless homophobe comments.
[QUOTE=Max the Immortal]
Bolding mine. It’s easy to get the impression that monstro is saying that David should not get the treatment he receives. I don’t think this is the case. I think that everyone in this thread can agree with the statements: “David is treated the way that everyone should be treated. It is unfair that Deshawn isn’t treated the way David is. Deshawn should be treated the way David is.”
[/quote]
Sometimes this might be the case, but other times David’s leg up comes at the direct expense of Deshawn’s. It all depends on the setting and the stakes.
I’ve seen white males treated like sage bastions of expertise despite being leagues less knowledgeable and capable than their non-white, non-male peers. I’ve seen them groomed for greatness simply because they fit the “right” mold. This usually means someone who doesn’t fit that mold (e.g. non-white, non-male) doesn’t get that grooming and has to work 4 times harder at being brilliant to get half the esteem they get for merely showing up.
Should everyone receive this kind of treatment? No. Not only is that infeasible because there are not enough top slots to seat everyone, but only the most competent should rise through the ranks, not just the ones who look a certain way.
So in this situation Deshawn should not be treated like David.
Three points:
- When someone says, “Everyone with a soul has already left the South,” and suggests the rest of the country jettison the South, no, actually, that’s not implied.
- The guy suggested I move to his home state of Colorado, headquarters of the famously gay-friendly American Family Association.
- His jerkitude wasn’t the most relevant part of the story. The relevant part of the story is the other guy who accused me of having some nerve as a straight white male to object to a gay man’s insults of the South, misusing the privilege concept in a big way. It is that misuse that pertains to the thread. If I’m wrong on the substance, I still have a right, as a Southern straight ally, to participate in the conversation at least as much as does a snide gay man who’s never set foot in the South. In some ways I know MORE about the experiences of gay Southerners than he does (and, of course, in other ways I know less).
My only point is that when people are experiencing slightly emotional days, it’s polite to cut them some slack and I suspect that was what was underlying the second person’s comment.
(Believe me, I’m steeling myself. I’m not really sure what the odds are that MN is going to defeat either of its amendments. If the anti-marriage equality amendment passes, it’s going to be very hard for me not to post something to the effect of “you’re all fuckers” on facebook. And I’m probably not going to make efforts to avoid it in order to not irritate MN fanboys.)
Nonsense. This is classic “everyone secretly agrees with me” reasoning. The actual white racists for one aren’t going to feel guilt at all; they think whites are superior. And no matter how much people want to ignore it, most people who hear the term are going to regard it as a racist statement against all the whites who are not “privileged” in the way that nearly everyone uses the term.
And other reason it “stings” for a lot of people is because it’s clearly meant as an insult. Not as an argument for equality, or as some attempt to enlighten white people as to the real circumstances of the world, but as an insult. Just look at how discussions of it are immediately accompanied with sneers like “whiny bitches”. This is a way of calling all white people evil parasites while pretending to be all noble and enlightened and fighting for equality.
This is nonsense.
Would you balk at saying there’s such thing as “Christian privilege” ? Does it strike you as insulting to describe pro-Christian bias in such terms? I mean, a Christian can go practically anywhere they want to in the U.S. and talk about Jesus and God as if they are real people, without worrying about being treated like a crazy person. I’ve actually been to government sponsored functions where the audience was implored to bend their head in prayer. But let an Muslim whisper Allah Akhbar a little loudly, and they risk having the FBI on their tail. Let an atheist publicly say they don’t believe in God, and they might find themselves socially ostracized, harrassed, or even out of work. Christians don’t walk around worried that their beliefs will complicate their lives like non-Christians do.
So tell me, when I say this is what Christian privilege looks like, do you think I’m saying this to insult Christians? Do you really think the point of this phrase is to make Jesus believers feel bad about themselves, rather than calling attention to religious bias and discrimination?