Video: Whites are privileged, and that's unfair

[tomndebb]

@lance_strongarm

Then why did the focus on whiteness? Why not make a PSA saying “speak against unfair privilege in general?”

Why should they? If they perceive a problem–or a slew of problems–they are going to get more bang for their buck by focusing on short messages that grab attention for each one rather than posting a much longer message that is confusing in having multiple problems to address.

The PSA is short. It grabs attention with its visuals. It addresses a particular situation that many people do not consider in their day-to-day lives. It is to the point. That is how PSAs work.

Pollution is a serious problem. Do you oppose a PSA that addresses littering because it does not also address industrial pollution, mismanagement of landfills, and household dumping?

@lance_strongarm

I’ll speak out against unfair treatment when I see it - all kinds, not just racial.

Bully for you.
Do you have some sort of problem with people addressing individual issues individually? Is there some minimum number of issues that one needs to address in a PSA before it is legitimate?

[tomndebb]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

Has anyone ever lost a job because of their hairstyle, do you think?

Yep.

Bad hair day

Taco Bell Employee Fired for Refusing Haircut Gets EEOC to Take His Case (with a dash of religion)
Blue hair - Wikipedia

[newcomer]

Okay, I kind of understand the motivation behind pointing to a White privilege but how come pointing to other identifiable groups’ privileges is more often than not interpreted as racist or discriminatory in general?

What’s so special about White privilege that seems to be as they say “fair game”?

Aren’t there some other types of privileges that are based on other factors (like celebrity, money, banksters, etc) where people get a privileged treatment that should be call out?

[lance_strongarm]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

Has anyone ever lost a job because of their hairstyle, do you think?

Yes. Not many, but yes.

So is hairstyle out? That’s one down.

[lance_strongarm]

@tomndebb

Why should they? If they perceive a problem–or a slew of problems–they are going to get more bang for their buck by focusing on short messages that grab attention for each one rather than posting a much longer message that is confusing in having multiple problems to address.

Well, no, that’s not why. But there’s no reason they couldn’t simply say “unfairness.”

The PSA is short. It grabs attention with its visuals. It addresses a particular situation that many people do not consider in their day-to-day lives. It is to the point. That is how PSAs work.

Why have a PSA at all then?

Pollution is a serious problem. Do you oppose a PSA that addresses littering because it does not also address industrial pollution, mismanagement of landfills, and household dumping?

Most PSAs about pollution do just say “pollution” and not a specific type. Would you think a PSA about one specific type of pollution would be a little, well, too specific?

My point isn’t about the PSA though. It’s about the focus on white privilege. And yeah, it’s fine to put that at the top of the list of unfairness. It’s by far the biggest one, bigger than all the rest combined. But it’s not the only one, and we should remember that if we don’t want to think too simplistically about this.

Do you have some sort of problem with people addressing individual issues individually? Is there some minimum number of issues that one needs to address in a PSA before it is legitimate?

No, and I wasn’t implying that.

The problem I have with this PSA is that it implies that whites are somehow responsible for their privilege. That it’s our fault. Well, I didn’t ask to be favorably discriminated for. If I ever see it happening, I’ll oppose it. But there’s only so much I can do about it.

I also resent the idea that I’m not already aware of it, but maybe there are some out there who aren’t, I don’t know.

[lance_strongarm]

@tomndebb

Yep.

http://www.fmylife.com/work/14033454
Taco Bell Employee Fired for Refusing Haircut Gets EEOC to Take His Case (with a dash of religion)
Blue hair - Wikipedia

Let’s not forget cases like this, which mix hair and race:

School's refusal to let boy wear cornrow braids is ruled racial discrimination

[tomndebb]

@lance_strongarm

Well, no, that’s not why. But there’s no reason they couldn’t simply say “unfairness.”

Sure there is. Many people fail to recognize the prevalence of “white privilege” in this country. To address that, one needs to call attention to it.

@lance_strongarm

Why have a PSA at all then?

To call attention to a particular situation that is too little recognized.

@lance_strongarm

Most PSAs about pollution do just say “pollution” and not a specific type. Would you think a PSA about one specific type of pollution would be a little, well, too specific?

You are going to tell me you have never seen an ad against littering? I could only believe that if you had already established that you did not own and never watched a TV and have never gone to a movie in a public theater.

@lance_strongarm

My point isn’t about the PSA though. It’s about the focus on white privilege. And yeah, it’s fine to put that at the top of the list of unfairness. It’s by far the biggest one, bigger than all the rest combined. But it’s not the only one, and we should remember that if we don’t want to think too simplistically about this.

Piffle. It says nothing of the sort.
Rather, it says, here is an issue that exists that is too little recognized and by pointing it out it will be easier to stop. NOTHING in the PSA says that it is the biggest problem that we face, either as a society or even as one or another perceived race within it. It simply says that this problem will be more effectively addressed if more people are aware of it and they are attempting to increase that awareness.

@lance_strongarm

The problem I have with this PSA is that it implies that whites are somehow responsible for their privilege. That it’s our fault.

Nothing in the PSA says that.

@lance_strongarm

I also resent the idea that I’m not already aware of it, but maybe there are some out there who aren’t, I don’t know.

I don’t litter, but I don’t get personally offended that there are PSAs against littering. I vote, but I don’t get personally offended by PSAs encouraging voter turnout. Why are you getting personally offended about a generally broadcast PSA? If they came you your door, handed you a DVD and said, “Here, you need to watch this,” I could see your point, but “resenting” a PUBLIC Service Announcement that you do not believe applies to you seems a bit overly dramatic.

= = =

I am not a big fan of the phrase “white privilege” because people focus on the word “privilege” and it tends to get overblown with the sort of wrangling that we have seen in this thread. Some people go out of their way to overstate the situation and others pretend it does not even exist. However, that is the phrase that has come to describe the phenomenon and it has been around for twenty or thirty years, so, just as I find protests silly that argue that “homophobia” is not really a fear or that “anti-semitism” should apply to Arab Semites as well as to Jews, I find it pointless to nitpick the phrase that most conveniently describes the phenomenon based on decades of usage.

[Lochdale]

[quote=“jsgoddess, post:252, topic:625928”]

Lemme try another analogy.

Say you’re in a grocery store and you are over 6 feet tall. A very short woman is straining to reach something on the top shelf. She can’t quite reach it and you, at over 6 feet, can reach it easily.
QUOTE]

So you’re saying that there are differences between the races akin to height differences between a man and a very short woman?

[florez]

[QUOTE=lance strongarm;15212537
Hence me pointing out that you CANNOT just point to a white and say “advantaged” and a black and say “disadvantaged!” That’s incredibly simplistic…[/QUOTE]

####################################################

When I wrote IMO it is important for white people to clearly know who is advantaged and who is not, using those examples, I guess that I was not clear enough in that I did not mean a simplistic black disadvantage/white advantage.

Racial profiling is a problem for many brown people as well as black people, and I doubt you will deny that, and say it affects white people just as much. And would you deny that sentencing and conviction rates speak as to the disadvantage of whites?

And IMO it does often boils down to the little things in life that white people take for granted.
For example housing and loans business have had legal actions taken against them for discriminatory practices, and will be forced to change; but that does not mean fairness will be practiced by each individual in the business.

For example when I wanted a real estate agent to contact me, it became a joke for myself and my Native American SO, being that we are equally dark skinned, yet when using his Anglo last name in correspondence by email, we received a far better chance of hearing back from an agent then when using my Hispanic last name.

And from a Mexican-American perspective, education is often to the advantage of whites. For example in history class, we have a different view of how the border between US and Mexico came to be, the history of the Alamo, etc, and yet we must sit through a class, with our native friends learning how heroic Indian killing, land grabbing, America discovering white folks accomplished all these great things.

Not to mention that we continually have to fight to keep our language programs, ethnic studies and culturally relevant educational programs that we originally had to fight to obtain in the first place as part of the civil rights struggle.

[Sitnam]

Notwithstanding Chris Rock, I’d trade white privilege for wealth privilege.

[lance_strongarm]

@tomndebb

Sure there is. Many people fail to recognize the prevalence of “white privilege” in this country.

I guess I just find that hard to believe, but maybe it’s because I am aware.

You are going to tell me you have never seen an ad against littering? I could only believe that if you had already established that you did not own and never watched a TV and have never gone to a movie in a public theater.

Sure, but was it about littering paper cups, or just littering in general? Anything can be too specific.

Piffle. It says nothing of the sort.

Rather, it says, here is an issue that exists that is too little recognized and by pointing it out it will be easier to stop. NOTHING in the PSA says that it is the biggest problem that we face, either as a society or even as one or another perceived race within it. It simply says that this problem will be more effectively addressed if more people are aware of it and they are attempting to increase that awareness.

I’M saying it is.

Nothing in the PSA says that.

This is how people perceive the PSA. I see that implication.

I don’t litter, but I don’t get personally offended that there are PSAs against littering. I vote, but I don’t get personally offended by PSAs encouraging voter turnout. Why are you getting personally offended about a generally broadcast PSA?

I’m not personally offended.

But hey, this isn’t just about littering, it’s about something much more complicated.

If they came you your door, handed you a DVD and said, “Here, you need to watch this,” I could see your point, but “resenting” a PUBLIC Service Announcement that you do not believe applies to you seems a bit overly dramatic.

What’s the difference between coming to me and handing me a DVD and running a PSA though?

I am not a big fan of the phrase “white privilege” because people focus on the word “privilege” and it tends to get overblown with the sort of wrangling that we have seen in this thread.

Well, yeah, that’s kind of my point too.

Some people go out of their way to overstate the situation and others pretend it does not even exist. However, that is the phrase that has come to describe the phenomenon and it has been around for twenty or thirty years, so, just as I find protests silly that argue that “homophobia” is not really a fear or that “anti-semitism” should apply to Arab Semites as well as to Jews, I find it pointless to nitpick the phrase that most conveniently describes the phenomenon based on decades of usage.

I think it’s not only someone’s right to dispute terms, it’s essential to get the terms right. It’s not nitpicking. Don’t get “personally offended” by it! The terms are very important. They may imply all kinds of unintended (or intended) meanings that are unfair.

[lance_strongarm]

@florez

When I wrote IMO it is important for white people to clearly know who is advantaged and who is not, using those examples, I guess that I was not clear enough in that I did not mean a simplistic black disadvantage/white advantage.

Ah, but that’s the problem with the PSA.

Racial profiling is a problem for many brown people as well as black people, and I doubt you will deny that, and say it affects white people just as much. And would you deny that sentencing and conviction rates speak as to the disadvantage of whites?

Of course I’m not denying any of that.

And IMO it does often boils down to the little things in life that white people take for granted.

How do you know what white people take for granted? Have you asked them, or just assumed?

For example housing and loans business have had legal actions taken against them for discriminatory practices, and will be forced to change; but that does not mean fairness will be practiced by each individual in the business.

Well, no, but again, race is but one factor in that.

For example when I wanted a real estate agent to contact me, it became a joke for myself and my Native American SO, being that we are equally dark skinned, yet when using his Anglo last name in correspondence by email, we received a far better chance of hearing back from an agent then when using my Hispanic last name.

Did you count how many times you got a response each time? Did you test it by using both names with similar applications to see which got a response?

And from a Mexican-American perspective, education is often to the advantage of whites.

And that’s education that is the advantage - not race.

For example in history class, we have a different view of how the border between US and Mexico came to be, the history of the Alamo, etc, and yet we must sit through a class, with our native friends learning how heroic Indian killing, land grabbing, America discovering white folks accomplished all these great things.

You can’t seriously be saying this is a “disadvantage”.

Not to mention that we continually have to fight to keep our language programs, ethnic studies and culturally relevant educational programs that we originally had to fight to obtain in the first place as part of the civil rights struggle.

Is language and ethnic studies a civil right? Maybe, maybe not.

In any event, I’m aware of these things already.

[jtart2]

The US is a culture primarily created by white people for white people. Everyone else has to conform to fit in. If you are born white, you pretty much fit in and are privileged. It’s not a bad thing, that’s just how it is (the Melting Pot, remember?)

In Japan, Japanese people are privileged, because it’s their culture. All this bickering gets you nowhere…it’s a common sense issue you can’t solve by arguing!
The only thing that will change is when whites are no longer the majority.

[florez]

@lance_strongarm

You can’t seriously be saying this is a “disadvantage”..

No I was just joking, it does minority children good to learn how white people in the Americas have provided so much opportunity, and have done so much to make this great land what it is.

I shudder to think what might have happened to us without them here.:rolleyes:

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@Shakes

Yes, we always need to make strides towards racial equality. But really, priority wise, racial equality is about number 5 or 6 on the list of things we need to be worrying about.

Yeah, maybe for you. Just like health care is really low on the list of priorities for a healthy young 25 year old.

[Darth_Panda]

I’m not aware of how one would go abut determining who is white and who isn’t. The whole concept of race is flawed and what a person looks like is really irrelevant to what their background is, so I don’t see how can say that “whites” are priveleged when that category doesn’t even exist. Some individuals are priveleged, but there’s no racial component to it. You can’t tell whether someone comes froma rich or a poor family by the color of their skin.

[tomndebb]

@lance_strongarm

@tomndebb

Piffle. It says nothing of the sort.

Rather, it says, here is an issue that exists that is too little recognized and by pointing it out it will be easier to stop. NOTHING in the PSA says that it is the biggest problem that we face, either as a society or even as one or another perceived race within it. It simply says that this problem will be more effectively addressed if more people are aware of it and they are attempting to increase that awareness.

I’M saying it is.

Yeah, but you are the one who has chosen to “resent” a few seconds of PSA. That sort of challenges your credentials on the topic. If you want to claim that the PSA makes the claim that it is the most important problem in society, then quote the portions that make that claim. Remember, the only statement in the video that directs the viewer to take any action says nothing more than “Our silence keeps it in place.” So, the only call to action is to simply note when the phenomenon occurs. There is simply no claim that it is the largest problem we face.

@lance_strongarm

@tomndebb

Nothing in the PSA says that.

This is how people perceive the PSA. I see that implication.

No, you choose to see that inference. The implication does not exist.

@lance_strongarm

I’m not personally offended.

Of course, not, just resentful.

@lance_strongarm

What’s the difference between coming to me and handing me a DVD and running a PSA though?

Now you are being disingenuous. What is the difference between a car dealer inviting everyone to come down to his lot and test driving his new cars and the same dealer coming up to your door and trying to sell you one he has picked out for you?

@lance_strongarm

I think it’s not only someone’s right to dispute terms, it’s essential to get the terms right. It’s not nitpicking. Don’t get “personally offended” by it! The terms are very important. They may imply all kinds of unintended (or intended) meanings that are unfair.

So, I can expect to see you in every thread discussing homophobia and antisemitism, arguing that those words should not have the meanings that they currently convey? The time to have argued against the phrase “white privilege” was in the late 1960s. Now that it is the accepted term for the phenomenon, it is silly to try to nitpick the meanings of its constituent parts. The phrase is over 40 years old–even older than I had recalled–and it already has a firm meaning in the American lexicon. If you would like a separate discussion as to whether “privilege” would be better served by a different word, fine, but carry that discussion as separate, not as an attempt to attack a mild little PSA that you are overstating in both tone and content.

[lance_strongarm]

@jtart2

The US is a culture primarily created by white people for white people. Everyone else has to conform to fit in. If you are born white, you pretty much fit in and are privileged.

Well, no, not really. It’s not that simple at all. There are plenty of whites who don’t just “fit in.” Plenty who are desperately poor too, and face daily disadvantages.

[lance_strongarm]

@tomndebb

Yeah, but you are the one who has chosen to “resent” a few seconds of PSA. That sort of challenges your credentials on the topic.

And here is the twisted logic I mentioned earlier. If I dare complain, it automatically makes my complaints illegitimate? No.

If you want to claim that the PSA makes the claim that it is the most important problem in society, then quote the portions that make that claim.

I think it is. Didn’t say the PSA does.

Remember, the only statement in the video that directs the viewer to take any action says nothing more than “Our silence keeps it in place.” So, the only call to action is to simply note when the phenomenon occurs.

It could mean alot more than that though. It could mean that I’m causing white privilege by doing nothing. Just by sitting here, right now.

No, you choose to see that inference. The implication does not exist.

I see the possibility of it. If you don’t, fine.

Of course, not, just resentful.

Yes.

Now you are being disingenuous. What is the difference between a car dealer inviting everyone to come down to his lot and test driving his new cars and the same dealer coming up to your door and trying to sell you one he has picked out for you?

What’s the difference between coming to my door with a DVD and running a PSA? I asked that question, please answer it.

So, I can expect to see you in every thread discussing homophobia and antisemitism, arguing that those words should not have the meanings that they currently convey?

Possibly. You got a problem with that?

The time to have argued against the phrase “white privilege” was in the late 1960s.

Uh, no, I was but a wee child then. We’re discussing it NOW. I’ll argue whenever I want. And if you think terms don’t ever change, and people never argue about them to change them, you’re naive.

Now that it is the accepted term for the phenomenon, it is silly to try to nitpick the meanings of its constituent parts. The phrase is over 40 years old–even older than I had recalled–and it already has a firm meaning in the American lexicon. If you would like a separate discussion as to whether “privilege” would be better served by a different word, fine, but carry that discussion as separate, not as an attempt to attack a mild little PSA that you are overstating in both tone and content.

No. I’ll argue it right here and right now. It’s a legitimate part of the discussion about a PSA that uses the term. If you have nothing to say about it and blindly follow whatever terms are handed to you, fine. I don’t.

[tomndebb]

@Darth_Panda

I’m not aware of how one would go abut determining who is white and who isn’t. The whole concept of race is flawed and what a person looks like is really irrelevant to what their background is, so I don’t see how can say that “whites” are priveleged when that category doesn’t even exist. Some individuals are priveleged, but there’s no racial component to it. You can’t tell whether someone comes froma rich or a poor family by the color of their skin.

What a person looks like may not conform to their actual ancestry, but what a person looks like often has a definite bearing on how that person is treated. The concept of race is flawed, but a lot of people act on that flawed perception. I don’t get followed by police for driving through a black neighborhood and I am only going to be stopped if I take an action that suggests I am looking for drugs or prostitutes. I do not get followed by sales clerks on the grounds that I am one of “those people” who are likely to be a shoplifter.

The notion that there are no people being treated in a particular way due to their perceived race is unrealistic.