# Responses to a straight, white male complaining on these message boards. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 3, 2014, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754 "2014-03-03T15:01:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2014, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/181 "2014-03-06T15:56:07Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Was [this the case?](http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1993-02-28/news/1993059021_1_music-policy-dance-music-baur) If so, it was dismissed, with an argument similar to what I’ve been saying Yes, that looks like it. Thanks for finding it! The issue wasn’t just a right to hear certain music. The case was based on the idea that using music to discourage people of a certain race from patronizing it was a way of discriminating. Kind of like burning a cross is a criminal act just because it is meant to intimidate. But the courts didn’t buy it, so that’s that. I’m not sure how I feel about it. I think it was a stretch. I understand wanting to punish people who do things for racist reasons, but sometimes you just can’t. I certainly wouldn’t want a situation where you have to play certain kinds of music just for inclusion’s sake even without evidence of racial intent. > [@](#): > > That’s barbaric! Life was tough in those days. We didn’t whine like you kids today. We walked through that 20 feet of snow to school and that was that. > [@](#): > > Fair, so I’ll rephrase: I personally am not prepared for an AA debate at this time. Fair enough. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2014, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/182 "2014-03-06T16:17:33Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > But why would something alarm you just for being “superfluous” In fact, it might be considered refreshing honesty - “we cater mostly to white audiences, and we admit it.” And since there’s now a BET, who can really complain? Black programming has access to televisions now too. I answered this question when I said it smacks of separatism not inclusion. Heterosexual TV would connote the same thing. I can turn on the TV and see plenty of opposite sex relationships and interests. So having a station dedicated to straight themes, by virtue of being superfluous, is making a political statement that a station dedicated to homosexual themes does not. Failure to get this principle reflects an unsophisticated understanding of how the world works. You might as well be asking why no one gets worked up when fat women refer to themselves as BBW (big beautiful women). As a thin gal, the number of tomatoes hurled at me would be in the hundreds if I went around calling myself a TBW. Should anyone be expecting me to gnash my teeth over this double standard? I hope not. > [@](#): > > Just to clarify - are you criticizing the BET name for having a reference to race? I didn’t quite understand your comment. No, I don’t criticize BET for it’s name because there’s nothing wrong with calling a duck a duck. If BET is aimed towards black people, why shouldn’t they call themselves BET? My opinion is that anyone who is actually bothered because “black” is in the station’s name is only bothered because they have an unsophisticated understanding of race politics. > [@](#): > > Okay, but would you think a book called “White Boy” is racist? You might laugh if it was about a white person’s struggle with racial oppression, but suppose it was just about a white person’s views and experiences on race? Why would I think it was racist? > [@](#): > > (And perhaps the kid said the book is racist because he didn’t know it was by and about a black author. The kid wasn’t the type to care about anti-black racism, so it’s very unlikely this was the case. He was just a victim of his own silly emotional response. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2014, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/183 "2014-03-06T16:24:16Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Yes, that looks like it. Thanks for finding it! > > The issue wasn’t just a right to hear certain music. The case was based on the idea that using music to discourage people of a certain race from patronizing it was a way of discriminating. Kind of like burning a cross is a criminal act just because it is meant to intimidate. But the courts didn’t buy it, so that’s that. I’m not sure how I feel about it. I think it was a stretch. I understand wanting to punish people who do things for racist reasons, but sometimes you just can’t. I certainly wouldn’t want a situation where you have to play certain kinds of music just for inclusion’s sake even without evidence of racial intent. Here again, though, the comparison to television isn’t particularly apt. The issue in the nightclub case was, as you say, that the club was allegedly using the music selection to get black folks to leave the club - that is, subtly working to deny them accomodation, on the basis on their race. A television network can’t do that, anyone who owns a TV has the same access as anyone else to the programming being broadcast; there’s no denial of accomodation. Demanding televised content tailored to one’s specific race/religion/gender would be analogous to demanding that the local metal club play some hymns, on the basis that playing only metal was, by itself, discriminatory to some sects of Christians. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2014, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/184 "2014-03-06T17:08:51Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > I answered this question when I said it smacks of separatism not inclusion. Heterosexual TV would connote the same thing. But don’t you think BET and Logo (gay TV channel) smack of separatism? > [@](#): > > I can turn on the TV and see plenty of opposite sex relationships and interests. So having a station dedicated to straight themes, by virtue of being superfluous, is making a political statement that a station dedicated to homosexual themes does not. Yes, there’s the underlying political statement, but there are similar ones with BET and Logo. > [@](#): > > Failure to get this principle reflects an unsophisticated understanding of how the world works. Relax. I’m just having a conversation to explore these ideas. But I reserve the right to disagree with you and not have you tell me it’s just because I’m naive. > [@](#): > > You might as well be asking why no one gets worked up when fat women refer to themselves as BBW (big beautiful women). As a thin gal, the number of tomatoes hurled at me would be in the hundreds if I went around calling myself a TBW. Should anyone be expecting me to gnash my teeth over this double standard? I hope not. But do you think it’s wrong to call yourself that? What would the harm really be, as long as you’re not doing it to make fun of BBWs? > [@](#): > > No, I don’t criticize BET for it’s name because there’s nothing wrong with calling a duck a duck. Which leads me right back to asking why we don’t just call mainstream channels “WET.” A duck is a duck. > [@](#): > > If BET is aimed towards black people, why shouldn’t they call themselves BET? The real question is why a station should aim toward black people. The name is just about how overtly they do it. (Again, I don’t have a problem with the channel or the name, this is just for discussion). > [@](#): > > My opinion is that anyone who is actually bothered because “black” is in the station’s name is only bothered because they have an unsophisticated understanding of race politics. Or they want to change those politics for the better. > [@](#): > > Why would I think it was racist? I don’t know. Would you? > [@](#): > > The kid wasn’t the type to care about anti-black racism, so it’s very unlikely this was the case. He was just a victim of his own silly emotional response. Or he was just joking. Or making fun of people who would be serious when they said that. ---
**Author:** ![protoboard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/fbc32d/32.png) [@protoboard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/protoboard)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2014, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/185 "2014-03-06T17:30:16Z")
I guess it kind of just sucks that you’re told by the left that “people like you” are the cause of all the evils and prejudices in the world. It really isn’t fair since white people and men are far from the only oppressors and bullies in history (or now). ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2014, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/186 "2014-03-06T18:25:28Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > But don’t you think BET and Logo (gay TV channel) smack of separatism? No. If you understand the argument that I’m making, then you should know how I would answer this question. > [@](#): > > Yes, there’s the underlying political statement, but there are similar ones with BET and Logo. No there isn’t. > [@](#): > > Relax. I’m just having a conversation to explore these ideas. But I reserve the right to disagree with you and not have you tell me it’s just because I’m naive. Okay, but you’re exploring these ideas in a weak rhetorical fashion and I’m not obligated to pretend otherwise. The questions you’re asking are much like someone asking, over and over again, why it’s fair organic cereals has a special aisle in the grocery store when we don’t do that with non-organic cereals. At a certain point, one must point out how vacuous this is as an actual hangup. Even in the realm of the navel-gazing philosophical, there’s not enough meat to sink teeth into. The inevitable question then emerges: “Is _this_ dilemma the thing that ties white men’s stomach up at night? Really?” Because everyone else out there is concerned about being stereotyped as thugs, terrorists, sexual deviants, and subhuman inferiors, and then paying real life prices for these stereotypes. I don’t think it’s wrong for white men to talk about the issues they face. Not at all. But it would really help–in terms of getting others to take them seriously–if the issues themselves were substantive and could be tied to real life problems. You can dismiss this POV if you’d like, but I’m just saying. It takes white privilege to even pretend as if BET is a problem that needs fixing. > [@](#): > > Which leads me right back to asking why we don’t just call mainstream channels “WET.” A duck is a duck. Because mainstream TV likes to pretend it represents everyone, even when it doesn’t. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2014, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/187 "2014-03-06T18:25:40Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > A television network can’t do that, anyone who owns a TV has the same access as anyone else to the programming being broadcast; there’s no denial of accomodation. That’s true now that we all have 500 channels. It was different back in the day when we only had four. But of course, that was what PBS was for. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2014, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/188 "2014-03-06T18:33:52Z")
BET and Logo are okay because those groups are not well represented on current TV. They exist to make up for a deficiency. This logic would not apply to a WET channel. There’s no plausible deniability that WET is making a political statement. Like it or not, being a minority changes things. The majority is always already represented. It’s the minorities that need an extra voice. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2014, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/189 "2014-03-06T18:34:57Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > No. If you understand the argument that I’m making, then you should know how I would answer this question. But I am asking. It sure looks like separatism to me. They’re separate channels for certain groups of people. I’m open to hearing you explain why that’s not the case. > [@](#): > > No there isn’t. Yes, there is. > [@](#): > > The questions you’re asking are much like someone asking, over and over again, why it’s fair organic cereals has a special aisle in the grocery store when we don’t do that with non-organic cereals. I could also compare it to asking why blacks have a different school too. Don’t get upset please, just bear with me. > [@](#): > > At a certain point, one must point out how vacuous this is as an actual hangup. Even in the realm of the navel-gazing philosophical, there’s not enough meat to sink teeth into. The inevitable question then emerges: “Is _this_ dilemma the thing that ties white men’s stomach up at night? Really?” No, probably not most. Not me. I’m just discussing it. > [@](#): > > Because everyone else out there is concerned about being stereotyped as thugs, terrorists, sexual deviants, and subhuman inferiors, and then paying real life prices for these stereotypes. I’m concerned about other things too, but this conversation happens to be about this issue. > [@](#): > > I don’t think it’s wrong for white men to talk about the issues they face. Not at all. But it would really help–in terms of getting others to take them seriously–if the issues themselves were substantive and could be tied to real life problems. You can dismiss this POV if you’d like, but I’m just saying. It takes white privilege to even pretend as if BET is a problem that needs fixing. I wasn’t saying that BET was one of those problems, not at all. I was just making a general comment. > [@](#): > > Because mainstream TV likes to pretend it represents everyone, even when it doesn’t. But so what? Now that we have BET, it doesn’t need to. Right? That’s my interest in the issue of spinning off channels by race or whatever - it resembles separatism, and possibly encourages it. But it’s just me thinking out loud. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2014, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/190 "2014-03-06T18:36:36Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > BET and Logo are okay because those groups are not well represented on current TV. They exist to make up for a deficiency. This logic would not apply to a WET channel. > > Like it or not, being a minority changes things. The majority is always already represented. It’s the minorities that need an extra voice. But the issue left on the table is whether minorities should have that voice by getting more mainstream attention or going off on their own in a “separate but equal” arrangement. It probably doesn’t matter in today’s TV market, or our society, though. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2014, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/191 "2014-03-06T18:45:30Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > That’s true now that we all have 500 channels. It was different back in the day when we only had four. But of course, that was what PBS was for. It was true then, too. Access to television programming has always been equal: anyone who owned a television (and later, a cable box, satellite dish, Roku, etc). Access to the nightclub, which was a building with walls and a limited capacity, was allegedly restricted to certain races, through the use of various and subtle means to drive certain races out. So, then, in terms of access and accomodation, TV networks are physically incapable of denying it due to the technology in use (there being no way to stop a given TV owner from receiving the broadcast, on the basis of his race, religion, national origin, etc); nightclubs are not. For a nightclub, all you need are walls, and you can potentially deny people accomodation. In terms of _content_, the specific shows offered and music played, both a TV network and nightclub can and do play whatever they think is best for their bottom line. Requesting specific content, as opposed to equal access and accomodation, is indeed the assertion of a right to hear certain music, or watch certain TV shows, or have every restaurant offer lutefisk on the menu, for those of Swedish or Finnish national origin. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2014, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/192 "2014-03-06T20:02:05Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > It was true then, too. Access to television programming has always been equal: anyone who owned a television (and later, a cable box, satellite dish, Roku, etc). Which showed only white people on every channel. It’s not access to watching TV we’re talking about, it’s access to the programming - the ability of black actors and producers or stories about them to be shown. But I agree these aren’t perfect comparisons. I’m just exploring them. > [@](#): > > In terms of _content_, the specific shows offered and music played, both a TV network and nightclub can and do play whatever they think is best for their bottom line. Requesting specific content, as opposed to equal access and accomodation, is indeed the assertion of a right to hear certain music, or watch certain TV shows, or have every restaurant offer lutefisk on the menu, for those of Swedish or Finnish national origin. Okay, suppose I came at it from a new angle (I’m good at that, as you probably can tell): what if a black leader complained that there’s only white people on the networks (in the days when there were only three) and the government needs to loosen up the licensing of broadcasters to give more than white people who own the broadcasting corporations access to the airwaves? (I keep challenging you with this stuff because you’re good at answering, not to be a pest. Though I am a pest, no question about that). ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2014, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/193 "2014-03-06T20:30:50Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Which showed only white people on every channel. > > It’s not access to watching TV we’re talking about, it’s access to the programming - the ability of black actors and producers or stories about them to be shown. > > But I agree these aren’t perfect comparisons. I’m just exploring them. That notion - the right to have content provided for you that you like - isn’t compatible with our concept of civil rights, which are fundamentally about non-interference. It’s the difference between a right to vote, and a guarantee that a candidate of your race or religion will run in an election. > [@lance strongarm](#): > > Okay, suppose I came at it from a new angle (I’m good at that, as you probably can tell): what if a black leader complained that there’s only white people on the networks (in the days when there were only three) and the government needs to loosen up the licensing of broadcasters to give more than white people who own the broadcasting corporations access to the airwaves? > > (I keep challenging you with this stuff because you’re good at answering, not to be a pest. Though I am a pest, no question about that). While admitting that I’m not well-versed on what it takes for a TV station to get an FCC license, I wouldn’t have a problem, in theory, with liberalizing the process to make access easier, so long as the basic principle of broadcast frequences not interfering with one another was upheld. ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2014, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/194 "2014-03-06T23:51:54Z")
> [@clairobscur](#): > > Same here. I’ve read stuff such as “Sorry, I’m not going to bother about issues men might have” (on the basis that men have it so much better than women), but indeed not much on this board. Yeah, since a majority of the posters on the SDMB are men, it would be surprising if complaints about legitimate men’s problems were commonly dismissed the way the OP describes. If one can’t find any sympathy for a complaint about a men’s issue on a message board where most of the posters are men then I think one needs to consider the possibility that the problem either isn’t due solely to being a man or is so trivial that most men don’t care about it. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2014, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/195 "2014-03-07T04:04:18Z")
> [@Lamia](#): > > Yeah, since a majority of the posters on the SDMB are men, it would be surprising if complaints about legitimate men’s problems were commonly dismissed the way the OP describes. If one can’t find any sympathy for a complaint about a men’s issue on a message board where most of the posters are men then I think one needs to consider the possibility that the problem either isn’t due solely to being a man or is so trivial that most men don’t care about it. Or, that men are taught not to care about other the welfare of other men. Or, they\* instinctively\* don’t care much about the welfare of other men. Men have been used to oppress and kill other men throughout history; I see no reason to think that the board being majority male means that you can expect it to be especially concerned for men. Gender solidarity is a myth. ---
**Author:** ![JKellyMap](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jkellymap/32/15880_2.png) [@JKellyMap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JKellyMap)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2014, 11:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/196 "2014-03-07T11:08:13Z")
> [@Mr.Nylock](#): > > I think straight white males have the whole Gattaca thing going on (I am referring to the character played by Jude Law); because we have perceived advantages the bar is higher for us than others. A straight white male can work very hard and you know make an honest living but not be a huge financial success but wouldn’t be thought of very highly, or very well respected for not making a certain amount of money or having a certain level of education. White males have it so much easier in lots of ways though, so I think they should not complain too much. I only read the first 20 posts or so, but of those, this came closest to my thoughts. I’d add that, for me, the issue is _added pressure one imposes on oneself_ to “make it” (financially and/or professionally), and therefore _greater disappointment in oneself_ when this higher bar isn’t achieved. In other words, I have a constant fear of or feeling of _not living up to expectations_. Minorities, women, and the poor feel similar pressures, but for them it’s driven by a fear if failing to show the world how low expectations can be overcome, whereas for white men like me it’s more like “I DON’T HAVE ANY BUILT-IN EXCUSE TO FAIL, SO IF I _DO_ FAIL I SHOULD FEEL REALLY GUILTY FOR HAVING WASTED A LIFE WITH ALL THESE INHERENT ADVANTAGES” (lamentable advantages due to our culture and history, obviously – not _genetic_ ones). This has had real effects on my life path…contributing to the professional dithering\* in certain periods which lead me to, today, being somewhat older than most of my professional peers. (Of the three advantages I cited which contributed to this, I think “not being poor” is the most directly relevant, followed by “not being Black or, perhaps, Latino”…in US culture, at least, “not being a woman” is less of an issue for what I’m talking about, and “not being gay” is, I think, completely irrelevant.) \*In part caused by a paralyzingly desire to make the right choices along one’s career path. I know, I know… “first world problems”! ---
**Author:** ![Martini\_Enfield](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/martini_enfield/32/11123_2.png) [@Martini\_Enfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martini_Enfield)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2014, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/197 "2014-03-10T13:22:50Z")
> [@andros](#): > > What are the current ratios of men to women, whites to minorities, and white men to all others at these corporations? > > If you can show me that white men are not currently over-represented in those companies, I’d be more inclined to buy this argument. Not sure about the US, but it’s common knowledge in Australia that there are some fields where the majority of people in them are female - notably teaching, nursing and media/communications. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2014, 1:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/198 "2014-03-10T13:34:04Z")
> [@andros](#): > > What are the current ratios of men to women, whites to minorities, and white men to all others at these corporations? > > If you can show me that white men are not currently over-represented in those companies, I’d be more inclined to buy this argument. > . Why do you assume that those white men all got their jobs because they’re white males? Perhaps white males are better qualified, simply because they benefit from better education or whatever, or past discrimination. That’s not fair, of course, but it doesn’t mean they don’t deserve their jobs. But their presence in current jobs isn’t the issue - the question was about getting hired, not who has been hired in the past. Why should young white men just entering the workforce or switching jobs pay for discrimination in the past? Should their race and sex be held against them in an attempt to use discrimination to fix past discrimination? Does that mean women or minorities aren’t as qualified and can only get hired with the help of discrimination, not on the merits? ---
**Author:** ![Donna\_Lange](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Donna\_Lange](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Donna_Lange)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2014, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/199 "2014-03-10T14:40:48Z")
The Straight white male has it so hard because he can afford Viagra. _bows_ … I got nothing really, I don’t know anything about the “plight” of men \>.\> Oh, oh! I got one! You can talk about how you have to shave all the time or look like a redneck! Thats a legitimate bitch for any white male. Well, it you don’t want to look like a redneck that is. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2014, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754/200 "2014-03-10T14:45:07Z")
> [@Donna\_Lange](#): > > The Straight white male has it so hard because he can afford Viagra. > > _bows_ > > … I got nothing really, I don’t know anything about the “plight” of men \>.\> > > Oh, oh! I got one! You can talk about how you have to shave all the time or look like a redneck! > Thats a legitimate bitch for any white male. Well, it you don’t want to look like a redneck that is. The problem is that you think the ONLY bitch people can make must be related to their sex or race, thereby pretending that ALL white males can’t possibly have any problems no matter what, simply because as a group they tend to be better off. But a white male can lose his job, become homeless, get cancer, whatever too. He’s an individual person, not just a white male. That’s why judging people by their race and sex is wrong, always, and it’s why this thread is corrupt. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754.md?page=9) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/responses-to-a-straight-white-male-complaining-on-these-message-boards/682754.md?page=11)