All they’d do is slap a couple of hundred pounds of metal on the guy’s car which was lighter. Which is essentially what people worry will happen to them when the do-gooders start talking about making everyone ‘equal’.
Man you are dense aren’t you?
Did MLK make great civil rights progress by running around telling folks how great white people had it? And it’s a damn shame somebody even remotely worthy taking his place didn’t.
I shouldnt have said the dense part. My apologies for that. That was out of line.
But I think my point still stands.
Man you are dense aren’t you?
Did MLK make great civil rights progress by running around telling folks how great white people had it? And it’s a damn shame somebody even remotely worthy taking his place didn’t.
[/QUOTE]
That’s a kind of a funny juxtaposition there, really. Because it goes to prove my point exactly – Dr. King and his family were constantly harassed and threatened, until he was eventually murdered for standing up for the civil rights of black people. If we accept your analysis that he spoke his message in the non-threatening way you prefer, it illustrates clearly that there’s no way for a member of an oppressed group to speak up on behalf of that group without stirring up rage.
Given that, it’s hard for me to muster up much sympathy for someone in a societally dominant group who hears a message about how members of a minority are being oppressed and gets offended and spouts a bunch of self-righteous outrage about how the message wasn’t delivered politely enough. It’s hard to believe that their real problem is with the format of the message and not the content. Especially in your case, since you’re continuing, after having it explained to you more than once, to reiterate the absurd idea that the phrase “white privilege” somehow means that all white people have it great.
Who is “them”?
And you think it would have gone BETTER if he ran around saying what he said in a MORE threatening or less polite or less politcally savy manner?
He made a damn lot more progress than the Black Panthers and the Jessy Jackson “weesas being oppressed and whiteys evil” types ever did.
MLK wanted dignity and fairness for EVERYONE. He didn’t bitch that white people got more fair treatment and that was unfair. He strived for black people to get fairness and dignity too.
I’m outa here. I gotta yatch to go wax.
What the fuck are you talking about? King spent a great deal of time pointing out that blacks were being oppressed.
Jesse Jackson marched on Selma with King and was selected by King to run SCLC’s campaign in Chicago.
This is quite possibly the most moronic thing I’ve read on this site and that’s saying a lot.
One would have to be completely delusional if not irretrievably stupid to believe for two seconds that any “minorities” think that video was in any way “real”.
Obviously, I trust neither of those is true of you.
I can’t think of any civil rights victory he obtained by convincing white people of anything. His biggest specific accomplishment, at least that I can think of, was the Montgomery Bus Boycott, and that was done via economic pressure.
So I can’t see how your point is applicable at all here.
What? I am having a hard time reading your quote as anything but an attempt to write in some sort of black dialect which, wow.
Yeah, I doubt actual examination of his speeches would show that he never complained about the advantages of white people and only mentioned the disadvantages of black people. And it’s such a distinction-without-a-difference that it’s hard for me to see it as anything but a rationalization anyway.
And Dr. King didn’t speak about “equality for everyone” so much as the inequality faced by specific groups – black people and, later on, poor people. He did his advocacy work in a way that challenged and outraged the people in power – the backlash against the Montgomery Bus Boycott was fierce, because his strategy was not based at all on mollifying angry white people.
So pretty much everything you’ve said about him is completely insupportable.
That’s odd, I’ve seen lots of white men with government jobs.
In fact most government workers I’ve met not only have penises, but white ones as well.
The penises may be smaller than the darker ones but I don’t think that’s a reason to be denied a job and I’ve never seen any employer say “sorry, if you had a darker penis or no penis we’d take you.”
Nobody is saying white people should beat themselves up for being white. Just *acknowledge *that your whiteness is a benefit. Agree that you would have it worse than you currently do, all other things being equal, if you weren’t white.
Well, that and don’t stand in the way of policies that benefit non-whites, like affirmative action.
But that isn’t what’s happening now. They might slap a couple hundred pounds of metal on the *rich *whites (in the form of taxation for the benefit of minorities). But affirmative action is what’s happening now. That does affect lower- and middle-class whites, but we shouldn’t have a problem with that because affirmative action is more akin to removing weight from non-whites than weighing down whites.
That comment is both racist and complete bullshit.
When has “Jessy(sic) Jackson” ever claimed that white people are evil?
Second when has “Jessy(sic) Jackson” said “weesas” or anything similar"?
Third, when doing a parody of Jewish politicians do you have them speak with exagerated Yiddish accents the way you had “Jessy(sic) Jackson” speak with a parody of an Ebonics accent?
Thanks
To be fair, he (more specifically his allies) convinced a bunch of white dudes at the Supreme Court to let the boycott proceed, and that’s what won the case. And he worked closely with white allies and made it clear they were welcome in the movement. But yeah, he also didn’t shy away from pointing out injustice in any way.
The word “privilege” really gets up my nose, but I think that’s because I first encountered it from some college radicals who’d use it as an attack rather than as a way of having a real discussion (they’d dismiss other folks’ contributions to conversations by trying to get those people to examine their white/male/straight/wealth/whatever privilege). It’s really my personal problem, though, as the word’s here to stay.
I mostly came in the thread with the Louis CK quote, and with the wonderful Jon Scalzi link that jsgoddess posted–if y’all haven’t read that, you really should.
That PSA? Not well done. Just saying, “Unfair!” doesn’t suggest any solutions. Yeah, they only have thirty seconds, but it gives the viewer nothing to do with any awareness of privilege. Without suggesting any positive steps, it leaves the impression that the white viewer is just supposed to feel bad, which is of course not the point.
edit: Also, rachellellellellogram, excellent posts in this thread!
My mind instantly said “Jar Jar Binks” a reviled Star Wars character who doesn’t have anything approaching an Ebonics accent.
The perception is that guy got my place because he was not white. It is about perception and fear.
Your strawman is complete bullshit.
Who has ever said that “poor whites aren’t supposed to complain”?
No, he has a Jamaican accent.
Lord knows, know one associates black people with Jamaica and no one complained that Jar-Jar Binks was a racist charicature and the voice-actor for Jar-Jar was obviously white.
Edit: my post came across far ruder than I intended. I apologize for that.
I agree that there are advantages to being white. But as a non-white person I don’t “feel” like I’m in the minority. I suppose technically I am but I don’t really notice when there are more white people around me than non-whites. I guess I’m just used to it to the point where I forget that I’m a minority. So the idea of “white privilege” is a lot more theoretical to me.
At the same time, the whole “let’s talk about privilege” thing does get a bit grating. It seems like it’s the topic du jour and that it’s primarily upper/middle class white folks who seem to love talking about it – whether it’s gender, race, or attractiveness. Reading people bemoan “thin privilege” just feels a little silly to me, to be honest.
Are we also supposed to go around saying, “Gee, it sure is great not to have cancer!”
While I have no idea whether the people who said that to you were right or wrong to do so, there are a lot of legitimate reasons to tell someone to back off and examine their privilege. One of the eternal annoyances of doing any kind of activist work (and I’m assuming that’s the sort of case you’re talking about, since I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone tell someone else to check their privilege when the conversation is about what bar to go to or their top ten desert island albums) is when people who aren’t part of the group in question earnestly but cluelessly attempt to dominate the discussion or direct the group’s efforts in the ways they wish. (I’ve heard this from enough other people working on causes separate from those I’ve been involved with to be pretty sure it’s a general problem.) The problems being that (a) no matter how many racial minority/female/LGBT/poor people a person might know, they really don’t understand the issues the group confronts in the same way members of the group do, and (b) members of a minority group rarely benefit from having members of the majority group explain their position because one of the fundamental facts of privilege is that whatever the minority group in question is, they’ve almost certainly heard this viewpoint a thousand times before, from the media, from friends or acquaintances, from hostile strangers, and so forth. For someone who’s not a member of a group, it’s easy to not realize how completely unnecessary their contribution may be. And talking over others can be hard to avoid because members of a minority group are almost certain to have lots of practice biting their tongues and not speaking up on their issues for the sake of sanity or even self-protection.
So stopping and checking your privilege is necessary for all of us at times when we are inadvertently talking over members of an oppressed group, even when it’s in the context of our earnestly wanting to play a role in making things better. It’s not pleasant to be told that, obviously. (And it’s certainly something I’ve had to do on occasion, so I understand that it’s not fun.) But the choice is between the discussion getting bogged down or else, basically, telling the person causing the problem to shut up and learn. And, well, letting the discussion become unproductive in order to protect someone’s feelings is not a great option.