# White privilege justifies racist policies? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 12, 2012, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-privilege-justifies-racist-policies/634452 "2012-09-12T00:36:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2012, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-privilege-justifies-racist-policies/634452/21 "2012-09-12T15:56:09Z")
Unless there is some compelling reason why there should be a brown-only drum class (I suspect minorities are not grossly underrepresented in drumming) this is a fucking stupid idea. On the other hand, assuming the principal is correct that “nobody was turned away”, and that a white person or girl could join if they wanted to, I don’t see what the big deal is. I am a member of the Hispanic Law Students Association at my university, and… I’m not Hispanic. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2012, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-privilege-justifies-racist-policies/634452/22 "2012-09-12T15:56:39Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > I think that’s the source’s fault, not the writer’s. How are we to know? ---
**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:** [September 12, 2012, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-privilege-justifies-racist-policies/634452/23 "2012-09-12T16:08:09Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > By a small group of people, endorsed by the media, and pretty much not used in normal conversations. _::: shrug :::_ It’s now pretty much the standard style. Sorry, but you can’t just blow this point off. > [@](#): > > Yep. You used the phrase in your title and made no mention of your antipathy to the phrase until the thread was well under way and you are now taking the thread in a direction that has nothing to do with the thoughts expressed in the OP. So nobody can bring up anything in their own thread that is directly related to it unless they mention it in the OP? Come on. > [@](#): > > The Original Poster of a thread has a limited amount of influence over how that thread can proceed, but changing topics in mid-stream is a hijack, regardless who posts it. This is not a hijack. That’s absurd. > [@](#): > > Absolutely. But starting a thread on the grounds that a person behaved foolishly and then changing the topic to object to one’s own language in the title of the thread is not the way to do it. I’m not objecting to my own language, I’m objecting to HERS. This is what the thread is about. > [@](#): > > Ms. Gutierrez’s words and actions are the topic you presented. Yes - her abuse of the term “white privilege” [QUOTE] **Lonesome Polecat** chimed in with a claim that the phrase used had a different meaning than the way in which she used it. Those are the themes running through this thread. > [@](#): > > If you tought that she should have been chastised for the term she used, then you should have included that objection in the OP rather than trying to change the topic in the middle of the thread. For God’s sake, this is ridiculous. You simply don’t want to discuss this issue because you disagree with me. > [@](#): > > If you believed that, (_although I do not see her claiming that anything should be taken away from whites, only that non-whites should be granted the same opportunities that she wrongly ascribes to whites_), She started a drum line where no whites are allowed. > [@](#): > > then you should have made that point in your OP rather than interrupting your thread at a later post. Your OP makes no mention of the phrase being used improperly (in your opinion). What is it with you? ---
**Author:** ![moejoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de053/32.png) [@moejoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/moejoe)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2012, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-privilege-justifies-racist-policies/634452/24 "2012-09-12T16:35:59Z")
Maybe it’s a context thing. This is North East Portland, pretty much the only pocket of “diversity” in a very white city. From the article it sounds like it’s also a school that is sending kids to high school at a 3rd grade reading level. I don’t think it’s too far out of bounds to suggest at least some white privilege in those circumstances. If property taxes are funding the schools (not sure if that’s true in Portland) and this is a low income area where those taxes bring in less funding, and the needs of the students are different than those of predominantly white students (language barriers or cultural bias in curriculum) then the white kids at the other schools are getting a better education. That’s not racism, it’s a privilege of the majority. ---
**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:** [September 12, 2012, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-privilege-justifies-racist-policies/634452/25 "2012-09-12T16:47:28Z")
> [@moejoe](#): > > Maybe it’s a context thing. This is North East Portland, pretty much the only pocket of “diversity” in a very white city. From the article it sounds like it’s also a school that is sending kids to high school at a 3rd grade reading level. > > I don’t think it’s too far out of bounds to suggest at least some white privilege in those circumstances. If property taxes are funding the schools (not sure if that’s true in Portland) and this is a low income area where those taxes bring in less funding, and the needs of the students are different than those of predominantly white students (language barriers or cultural bias in curriculum) then the white kids at the other schools are getting a better education. That’s not racism, it’s a privilege of the majority. I’m not questioning whether white privilege exists. I question whether the solution should involve “Latino privilege” or race-based policies, like having a Latino and black only drum line. I don’t think you solve racism with racism. ---
**Author:** ![moejoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de053/32.png) [@moejoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/moejoe)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2012, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-privilege-justifies-racist-policies/634452/26 "2012-09-12T17:06:38Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > I’m not questioning whether white privilege exists. I question whether the solution should involve “Latino privilege” or race-based policies, like having a Latino and black only drum line. > > I don’t think you solve racism with racism. yes, that’s why I said this isn’t racism, it’s privilege. And I do think the solution is to increase privilege for the minority group. The drum thing is a distraction, what’s happening is that a school in a majority white city is trying to figure out how to create better opportunity for their minority students. I’m hoping that they will get better at it with more practice. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2012, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-privilege-justifies-racist-policies/634452/27 "2012-09-12T17:17:38Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > It’s now pretty much the standard style. > > Sorry, but you can’t just blow this point off. Sure I can. It is irrelevant to the discussion. No one has denied that words can change meaning or that the words applied to the community of people whose ancestors were imported to the western hemisphere as slaves has changed. One more example does not have an affect on the discussion. > [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > So nobody can bring up anything in their own thread that is directly related to it unless they mention it in the OP? Sure, they can. If it were directly related, there would be no problem. You going off on a semantic tangent to argue a pet peeve that has no bearing on the actual actions or words of Ms. Gutierrez is not “directly” related. > [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > This is not a hijack. That’s absurd. > > I’m not objecting to my own language, I’m objecting to HERS. > > This is what the thread is about. Not the way you posted it. You used the phrase, yourself, without making any claim that it had some sort of “wrong” meaning until the thread was well along. You noted that her behavior and her statement were wrong without any indication that the phrase she used–a phrase in common use with a widely understood meaning for over forty years–was what really set you off. > [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Yes - her abuse of the term “white privilege” So, you were actually concerned about the phase, not her actions, despite your failure to even mention that in the OP? (And calling her use of the term an abuse when she used it in the way that it is always used indicates that you are not so much interestd in her actions as in a semantic quibble about the phrase.) > [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > For God’s sake, this is ridiculous. I agree that changing topics in the middle of a thread is ridiculous, that is why I object to you hijacking the thread with an off-topic semantic discussion. > [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > You simply don’t want to discuss this issue because you disagree with me. No. I simply don’t like threads that are hijacked. > [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > What is it with you? I don’t like hijacks. It makes it difficult to moderate arguments when the partiipants do not even agree on the topic–or when the OP cannot actually present the topic he or she wants to discuss. If you would like, I will change the title to reflect what you really wanted to discuss. ---
**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:** [September 12, 2012, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-privilege-justifies-racist-policies/634452/28 "2012-09-12T17:20:02Z")
> [@moejoe](#): > > yes, that’s why I said this isn’t racism, it’s privilege. And I do think the solution is to increase privilege for the minority group. The drum thing is a distraction, what’s happening is that a school in a majority white city is trying to figure out how to create better opportunity for their minority students. I’m hoping that they will get better at it with more practice. No, it’s racism to start a group that excludes people by race. It certainly doesn’t solve racism. ---
**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:** [September 12, 2012, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-privilege-justifies-racist-policies/634452/29 "2012-09-12T17:21:37Z")
I reject the idea that discussing the meaning or application of a term in a debate is irrelevant. I reject the idea that discussing the meaning or application of the term “white privilege” in this thread is a hijack. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2012, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-privilege-justifies-racist-policies/634452/30 "2012-09-12T18:10:31Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > I reject the idea that discussing the meaning or application of a term in a debate is irrelevant. > > I reject the idea that discussing the meaning or application of the term “white privilege” in this thread is a hijack. You are wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Beware\_of\_Doug](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/278dde/32.png) [@Beware\_of\_Doug](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beware_of_Doug)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2012, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-privilege-justifies-racist-policies/634452/31 "2012-09-12T19:01:29Z")
Good luck convincing him of _that_. The man needs self-righteousness like most people need air. ---
**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:** [September 12, 2012, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-privilege-justifies-racist-policies/634452/32 "2012-09-12T19:02:53Z")
> [@Beware\_of\_Doug](#): > > Good luck convincing him of _that_. The man needs self-righteousness the way most of us need air. Please refrain from personal attacks. ---
**Author:** ![Beware\_of\_Doug](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/278dde/32.png) [@Beware\_of\_Doug](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beware_of_Doug)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2012, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-privilege-justifies-racist-policies/634452/33 "2012-09-12T19:04:51Z")
OK, I take it back. But only in the interest of not piling on. ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2012, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-privilege-justifies-racist-policies/634452/34 "2012-09-12T19:05:35Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > You are wrong. Are you also “not listening” and “going to hold your breath”? Because I’d probably pay to see you pass out on the ground. You know, just to end White Privilege. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2012, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-privilege-justifies-racist-policies/634452/35 "2012-09-12T19:13:40Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > In short, I’m not sure how she says “Nobody was turned away from the drum corps” and “It’s not discrimination to turn people away from this drum corps” in the same sentence. That’s not what she said, though. > [@article](#): > > Gutierrez denies that any students were turned away from the drum corps, and vehemently rejects any suggestion that it is discrimination to offer a club catering to minority boys. There are two questions: 1. Has any non-minority or non-boy been turned away from the club when they asked to join? If none have asked to join, or if none have been turned away, that meshes with what she said. 2. Is it unfair to cater to a particular group? That’s a trickier question. Something they don’t mention in the article is that schools get graded by NCLB on both the population at large, and on particular subgroups. If 95% of your students pass the test, but only 50% of your African-American boys pass the test, your school fails the NCLB benchmarks. There is therefore TREMENDOUS pressure to direct programs and instruction toward specific subgroups. Sometimes this means directing attention toward race subgroups, if that’s where there’s a problem (and it often is a severe problem). If they have reason to believe a drum corps will improve the scores of minority boys (whether they’re correct in this reasoning is another discussion), it shouldn’t be surprising they direct that program toward minority boys. If they also allow girls and white boys to join, I’m afraid I can’t get too worked up over their doing what NCLB pressures them to do: direct disproportionate school resources toward underperforming subgroups. I do agree, however, that the concept of “privilege” is frequently misunderstood and over-used by activists, and it’s friggin annoying. ---
**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:** [September 12, 2012, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-privilege-justifies-racist-policies/634452/36 "2012-09-12T19:30:33Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > 1. Has any non-minority or non-boy been turned away from the club when they asked to join? Okay, she denies anyone was denied—but in the same breath, says it would be justified to deny someone. She’s a bundle of contradictions, in other words. > [@](#): > > 1. Is it unfair to cater to a particular group? That’s a trickier question. > > Something they don’t mention in the article is that schools get graded by NCLB on both the population at large, and on particular subgroups. If 95% of your students pass the test, but only 50% of your African-American boys pass the test, your school fails the NCLB benchmarks. > > There is therefore TREMENDOUS pressure to direct programs and instruction toward specific subgroups. Sometimes this means directing attention toward race subgroups, if that’s where there’s a problem (and it often is a severe problem). > > If they have reason to believe a drum corps will improve the scores of minority boys (whether they’re correct in this reasoning is another discussion), it shouldn’t be surprising they direct that program toward minority boys. If they also allow girls and white boys to join, I’m afraid I can’t get too worked up over their doing what NCLB pressures them to do: direct disproportionate school resources toward underperforming subgroups. Well, then perhaps the problem is the NCLB benchmarks. I understand their purpose, and agree with it, but they presume that the only factor in the racial gap is what happens at school. But you make a good point. On the other hand, you can aim policies at a race without specifically excluding another. Why not simply have a drum line for students with low test scores? That makes more sense as well as completely avoiding race-based policies. > [@](#): > > I do agree, however, that the concept of “privilege” is frequently misunderstood and over-used by activists, and it’s friggin annoying. Yes. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2012, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-privilege-justifies-racist-policies/634452/37 "2012-09-12T19:36:31Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Okay, she denies anyone was denied—but in the same breath, says it would be justified to deny someone. Reread the quote. No she doesn’t. She says it’s okay to CATER to a particular group, not to DENY a particular group. It’s an important difference. There’s a local event in my town that’s city-sponsored and features clogging and bluegrass, and there’s another event on the same weekend that features step-dance and steel drums. The crowd at the first event is overwhelmingly white; the second event attracts a much more diverse crowd (my town is pretty strong-majority white, so the second event has plenty of white folks, too). It’d be reasonable to characterize the first event as catering to white folks and the second event as catering to African-American folks. But a black person who comes to the first event won’t be turned away any more than a white person would be turned away from the second event. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2012, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-privilege-justifies-racist-policies/634452/38 "2012-09-12T19:39:10Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > On the other hand, you can aim policies at a race without specifically excluding another. Why not simply have a drum line for students with low test scores? That makes more sense as well as completely avoiding race-based policies. NCLB is a race-based policy. If you’re playing the numbers, as NCLB just about requires you to do, and you’ve got a goal of 90% of each subgroup passing the test, and 95% of your white kids are passing, and 55% of your black kids are passing, you can afford (under the numbers game) to neglect the 5% of white kids who are failing, but you can’t afford to neglect any of the black kids who are failing. I’m not saying that’s a good thing. I am saying NCLB has some unintended consequences. ---
**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:** [September 12, 2012, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-privilege-justifies-racist-policies/634452/39 "2012-09-12T19:42:16Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Reread the quote. No she doesn’t. She says it’s okay to CATER to a particular group, not to DENY a particular group. Okay, I see that. I was taking it in the context of a parent complaining that someone WAS denied. And I wonder if someone would be denied. But my problem is her response, where she implies that there are drum lines that “cater to” whites. Do you think that if I proposed a drum line that was designed specifically with white kids only in mind, she’d be okay with that? Would anyone? Even if I said anyone could join? > [@](#): > > It’s an important difference. There’s a local event in my town that’s city-sponsored and features clogging and bluegrass, and there’s another event on the same weekend that features step-dance and steel drums. The crowd at the first event is overwhelmingly white; the second event attracts a much more diverse crowd (my town is pretty strong-majority white, so the second event has plenty of white folks, too). > > It’d be reasonable to characterize the first event as catering to white folks and the second event as catering to African-American folks. But a black person who comes to the first event won’t be turned away any more than a white person would be turned away from the second event. That situation is fine with me. But we don’t know if that’s what happened in this case. If it’s just about different styles of music - much like her point about tortillas vs. PB&J - then she might be on solid ground. Perhaps that didn’t come through in the story. ---
**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:** [September 12, 2012, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-privilege-justifies-racist-policies/634452/40 "2012-09-12T19:47:43Z")
Note that the article, which may not be accurate, says the drum line was started “FOR black and Latino boys.” I read that as “ONLY for” them. But maybe it’s just aimed at them. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-privilege-justifies-racist-policies/634452.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-privilege-justifies-racist-policies/634452.md?page=3)