As it happens, I have been in the hospital most of the week and away from my computer. Nothing major - gallstones and minor surgery.
But that means I don't have all the ability to post that I normally do. Nonetheless, on the topic of the easily established reality of white privilege, here's what some people have said...
You can only see part of this, but it's very helpful...
https://study.com/academy/lesson/what-is-white-privilege-definition-examples-statistics.html
White privilege quantified...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4157125/
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/02/white-privilege-quantified/386102/
On everyday undeniable examples...
"1. I can if I wish arrange to be in the company of people of my race most of the time.
2.If I should need to move, I can be pretty sure of renting or purchasing housing in an area which I can afford and in which I would want to live.
3.I can be pretty sure that my neighbours in such a location will be neutral or pleasant to me.
4. I can go shopping alone most of the time, pretty well assured that I will not be followed or harassed.
5.I can turn on the television or open to the front page of the paper and see people of my race widely represented.
6. When I am told about our national heritage or about “civilisation,” I am shown that people of my colour made it what it is.
7. I can be sure that my children will be given curricular materials that testify to the existence of their race."
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/uk/culture/a32752175/white-privilege-everyday-examples/
more...
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0277953614003359
https://www.apa.org/news/podcasts/speaking-of-psychology/white-privilege
UPDATE:
More specifics, more quantified data about white privilege. This one has many specific, quantifiable instances and support for them.
"If education is the key to success, then there is no debate that whites have the advantage in America. In 2012, the U. S. Department of Education reported that about 33 percent of all white students attend a low-poverty school, while only 6 percent attend high-poverty schools. In comparison, only
10 percent of black students attend a low-poverty school, while more
than 40 percent of black students attend high-poverty schools.
This means that black students are more than six times more likely than
white students to attend a high-poverty school, while white students are
more than three times more likely than black students to attend a
low-poverty school..."
"It is a little-known fact that the average black person pays more for
almost every item he or she purchases. While there is no discount
Groupon that comes whit white skin, there might as well be. A John Hopkins study
showed that supermarkets were less prevalent in poor black
neighborhoods than in white neighborhoods with the same average income,
leading to increased food costs. News organization ProPublica recently
found that car-insurance companies charge people who live in black neighborhoods higher rates than people in predominantly white areas with the same risk."
https://www.theroot.com/yes-you-can-measure-white-privilege-1794303451
35 comments:
Two things:
First, Prayers for a speedy recovery.
Second, I don't see how those seven points prove anything more than one set of people have confidence in each area and the other doesn't. The reality is that there are those within each set who won't answer to those points in the same way as others of their own set of people. What do you do with them?
This was just a quick stop before logging off of the computer. More later, possibly...
They're pointing to the reality that, for people of color, these are real, lived experiences. That, TO YOU, it seems TO YOU that it's only a matter of confidence that some people have that others don't, is another bit of privilege that you're able to think that and wipe it from your mind, as if these concerns are not real concerns that people have in their experiences.
Do you understand that?
I understand your white guilt compels you to spew that crap. It's not "privilege" which informs my positions. It's fact and logical thought. Having a concern is NOT the same as having a legit reason to have the concern.
Those who feel guilty but cannot acknowledge guilt typically don’t do very well: are usually isolated; are usually anxious about the future; upset with change; looking to move from where they are because of a haunting sensation that they are known.
Marshal drives a truck; Dan works with lots of clients. Marshal has periodic job troubles; Dan has been a fixture. Marshal wants to leave his state; Dan loves Louisville. Marshal hates where our society is going; Dan celebrates it.
The obvious escapes Marshal.
Ow.
Marshal, on topic, please. If you make a claim, support it.
Why don't you prove the concerns you list are legitimate and not just irrational perceptions. It's the claim you're making when you cite them, and we're supposed to believe those represent legit concerns because you say so? Prove it. And how am I not on topic when I was adressing the topic of your post? Is it not an attempt to prove there's such a thing as "white privilege"? Were not those 7 points presented as examples of how it supposedly manifests? And what's with the "ow."? Did you chip a nail on your keyboard? And in what way is your troll's last comment in any way on topic?
Who are you to say that any of those are irrational perceptions? Based upon what? That you think it would be easy and thus you think it should be no big deal and thus you think no privilege?
THAT is white privilege.
And you have to be ON topic and present proof for any claims you make. I'm having to be more strict with you since you make so many wholly unsupported claims and allegations, as is too often the case with modern "conservatism," unfortunately.
Marshal has to repress his memory that he brought up white guilt. So when guilt comes up, his conscious mind can rationalize a lie that I brought it up out of the thin blue air.
He - and whiteness fundamentally - engages this psychotic strategy when his racism is obvious.
Dan. Try paying attention. I'm not saying they are irrational perceptions. I'm saying you list them as if they're rational without any basis for believing they are and as such provides evidence for the myth of "white privilege". Indeed, merwly daring to question the extremely lame premise is to you evidence of privilege. What a cheap dodge! Let's review again your list:
1. How is this not true for black people, given it's so absolutely common place? There are black churches, clubs, schools, universities, bars, places of employment with are at the least, majority black if not exclusively black. Did white people arrange for that, or did black people arrange for that with the express purpose of providing options for blacks to associate with other blacks? You don't have the integrity to answer this question.
2. This is in no way a concern exclusive to black people. Not even close. I'm going through it right now. That's what moving is all about: "Can I afford where I want to move?" Or the other side of the coin: "Do I want to move to the only places I can afford?" Michael Jordan can live anywhere he wants. I can't.
3. Also a concern of people of all races. I'm facing it now. I do know the town from which I'm leaving is comprised of many races and ethnicities. Everyone seems to get along fine.
4. I don't dress like a thug. Those who do provoke suspicion. Call it Presentable Privilege. Race has nothing to do with it.
5. It's "privilege" because a minority is unlikely to see another minority person in media? Really? You can't see how insanely stupid this is? What's more, it's racist by definition.
6. It's "privilege" because a minority person isn't more greatly represented in this way? As absurd as point 5, if not more so. How many black people even think this way??? Scant few, I'd wager.
7. They can see black people in American politics, entertainment, sports, even crime. They can look at their family, friends and neighbors. They can look in the freakin mirror. This may be the most irrational concern of the lot!
1. Marshal, it is, of course, true that in the daily grind of life, where black people go to work, go out to lunch, etc, that they are typically going to be surrounded by white people. And yes, there ARE black churches, schools, etc... but you KNOW why those came into existence, right? The racist oppressive history of our white churches and culture in years past that would not allow black people to worship or be a part of "their" clubs or dine in "their" restaurants or go to "their" schools. It is the reality that racism and the privileges afforded white people and denied black people are the reason that these places exist. That, and the safety of knowing you can meet to worship or go to school some place where you won't be denied opportunity because of your race. Opportunities that white people have and can take for granted because of their privilege.
Do you acknowledge that reality? Are you aware of that real history of privilege?
Marshal... " Did white people arrange for that, or did black people arrange for that with the express purpose of providing options for blacks to associate with other blacks?"
Yes, they literally did. By denying the privilege of access to these places to black folk and reserving that privilege for white folk.
Do you acknowledge that reality? Are you aware of that real history of privilege?
Also, do you acknowledge that such privileges afforded to white people and denied to black people has been an overt and real reality right into our lifetimes? That having black people at "our" churches, clubs and schools was still being denied or at least discouraged right up through the 70s, 80s, 90s and beyond.
Are you not aware of that history?
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1990-06-22-sp-236-story.html
I could point to endless such stories. I'm just doing a reality check on you, Marshal.
Before commenting on anything else, you must answer these questions to see if you're grounded in reality.
And just to move more directly to the point, I've added more data-specific, quantifiable instances of privilege that white folk enjoy by virtue of being white. Deal with those, if you want to comment after you've answered the previous questions.
1. Sure, if you go back thirty years or more such stories will be easier to find. Go back fifty and it gets easier. One hundred years...oh my gosh... But that very same CC now has black, Jewish and female members. So I doubt you could find too many today who restricts anybody...except for exclusively black or female organizations.
As to the rest, it does you no good to plead to history to try and debunk my response to the first point. The places I listed exist. So if the desire to associate only with blacks so compels, a black person need never associate with a white person. A co-worker of mine said that until he was well into his teens (could've been later, actually, as the comment was made several years ago) when he first met a white guy. And he lived in Chicago.
Whites arranged to deny blacks, so blacks arranged to provide for themselves. But again you must cite history to find "that reality" which is neither here nor there with regard to that first point. Given the reality of today, the point has little basis beyond one caveat: if a black person lives in an area with few other black people, they are likely to find it difficult to be in the company of other black people...unless they move to an area with a larger black population. If they choose to remain, the concern of point 1 is a matter of that choice.
I'm glad you can acknowledge that much reality. Now, 30 years is a blip, societally-speaking. If you oppress and deny opportunity to a group of people for hundreds of years, that doesn't change in one generation. Do you recognize THAT reality?
Whites denied privileges and opportunities for generations. That privileged white people and disadvantaged black people, as a group. That allowed time for generational wealth and privilege and circumstances to be accumulated for white folk that was denied to black people and black families. That, in the face of that institutional racism and denial of opportunity that black people provided something equivalent for themselves does not change the reality that there were opportunities denied.
I ask you a question that you must answer if you want to comment here.
1. Do you recognize the reality of WHY black people often created separate places to meet together, like churches, schools and clubs?
B. Do you acknowledge that it was PRECISELY because of white privilege and white oppression and racism that they were forced to do this?
C. Do you recognize the reality that this is just a generation ago?
D. Do you recognize the reality that it takes a while longer than one generation to build-up generational wealth and privilege?
Marshal... "That's a beautiful story. But it has nothing to do with point 1 and whether not it's true or a rational concern."
As noted, you must answer the questions put to you if you want to comment here. But I want to comment on this deleted-comment. You (not me, YOU) raised the reality of segregated settings for black people. I think you did so thinking you were scoring a point. But of course, you just pointed to PRECISELY the sort of thing that demonstrates white privilege.
White folks didn't/don't HAVE to create separate churches for themselves, they were/are welcome at any churches.
White folks didn't/don't HAVE to create separate clubs for themselves, they are/were welcome everywhere.
White folks didn't HAVE to create special educational opportunities for themselves, they've always had opportunity (privilege) to attend better schools.
And they've enjoyed these privileges for generations, giving whole families a head start that black folks didn't enjoy.
So, where you say it doesn't have anything to do with the point - that shows you're missing the point because it precisely IS the point, at least in part.
Marshal continues commenting without answering the questions. Marshal continue to entirely miss the point.
That there are wealthy black people and poor white people is NOT the point of white privilege.
E. Do you recognize that has nothing to do with white privilege?
If you wish to comment, begin by answering questions, Marshal. Not sure what you're not getting.
Don't be such a dreadful boor.
So many of today's conservatives have become such intellectual cowards that even the idea of answering reasonable questions terrifies them and sends them into irrational fits of lazy boorishness.
Marshal is writing hundreds if not thousands of words to avoid answering simple questions that would only take a few words. One must wonder why?
Marshal, in a now deleted comment where wasted more words without answering the questions put to him, said...
"What relevance do your questions have to the point we were discussing?"
1. My blog, my rules. If I ask you questions, I expect the respect that you just answer them. In the typical adult world, answering questions is just a rational part of conversations.
2. That question you asked (while NOT answering my questions) has already been answered.
You ask the relevance of the reality of the history of separate black churches and groups... as I've already answered, those point to the reality of white privilege insofar as white people have/had the privilege of just being able to attend these groups and be accepted. Black people, by and large, didn't enjoy that privilege.
No diversion. That's the reality of our history.
I'm just taking it step by step and seeing if you recognize that reality of our factual history.
Answer or quit whining and go away.
Answer ALL the bold questions above.
Your unnecessary questions meant to avoid reality:
"1. Do you recognize the reality of WHY black people often created separate places to meet together, like churches, schools and clubs?"
Yes. But it doesn't mitigate the fact that if a black person wishes, a black person can arrange to be in the company of black people most of the time. Indeed, it's irrelevant to that fact and is why you set aside that fact and asked this question.
"B. Do you acknowledge that it was PRECISELY because of white privilege and white oppression and racism that they were forced to do this?"
Yes...initially. But it doesn't have anything to do with the fact that if a black person wishes, a black person can arrange to be in the company of black people most of the time. It's totally irrelevant, in fact. Either blacks can arrange to be in the company other blacks most of the time or they can't. It's clear and obvious they can and you can't stand the fact you have one less legitimate concern to use to push the myth of "white privilege".
"C. Do you recognize the reality that this is just a generation ago?"
Well aware. The misdeeds of Democrats like you are well known. But this point C further supports the reality that blacks can now, if they choose, arranged to be in the company of other black people most of the time. Thanks for the help.
"D. Do you recognize the reality that it takes a while longer than one generation to build-up generational wealth and privilege?"
Aside from the fact that this has absolutely NO relevance to the question of blacks being able to associate with other blacks any time they like, the fact is it isn't actually an issue in any way unique at all to black people. Nor is it a universal truth among any one race. There are too many wealthy people of all races for this to be true....wealth developed within a single person's life which can accommodate several generations of financially responsible descendants.
"E. Do you recognize that has nothing to do with white privilege?"
That there are wealthy black people and poor white people wasn't in response to the "white privilege" myth. It was in response to the claim that it always takes several generations to develop generational wealth and that blacks today are somehow denied the ability to create wealth. Here's a tip: if you're going to submit a premise, and the premise is then proven to be crap, have the integrity of accepting the attempt to use the crappy premise to bolster your position failed and not try to dig deeper the hole in which you've put yourself with more crappy statements.
There. I've answered all your unnecessary questions directly with explanations for why they were unnecessary, exposing them for what they are...diversions from accepting the reality that point 1..."1. I can if I wish arrange to be in the company of people of my race most of the time."...holds for blacks as well as whites, and thus makes the list only 6 points long at this time, or until you muster the courage to address them each.
So now, if you delete THIS comment, your deceitful cowardice will be proven yet again. Do as you wish, but you've lost this battle. I'm done with this non-example of white privilege and ready to shred the rest. Got a pair?
It's white privilege to think we can dictate who marries whom. No state where black and brown people determine electoral and legislative outcomes have ever decided to dictate who marries whom.
But the Republican Senator from Indiana, Mike Braun, said that states should decide if interracial marriage is legal for that state.
Right wing sick-in-the-head people like Marshal and Craig and Stan and the fake bagpiper are so afraid by the progress of human society and how that means we all get along like slavery and Jim Crow is over... that they are regurgitating the poltical sounds of white people from 1950 when Jim Crow was still the powers that be: explicitly in the South and undercover in the North.
It is amazing to be in conversation on our various blogs with proto-Fascists like Marshal and Craig and Stan and the fake bagpiper, et al.
Outlawing interracial marriage: it's all about making white people feel like they alone are still in control. And this is what Marhsal needs to make sense of his life. God be damned. God is just a name for whitey.
Dan,
Why do you let your boy lie like that about those like me? Have you simply not seen his comment until now? I know you play fast and loose with the "my blog, my rules" canard, if I submitted something like that, you'd delete me. You used to talk about slander and libel. Is it just a matter of who targeted by the libel?
Marshal wills to erase my wife's existence. He's said so a handful of times. Marshal precedes Mike Braun by years in decideing for himself not only that my marriage is illegal but is nihilism and must be erased.
Marshal is a brutalizing racist. So far he does it by his filthy mouth. But he has a white man's fragile breaking point becasue his only god is whitey. There is zero capacity in Marshal to confess his sins. He cannto even conceive of them. He makes his identity a cosmic despot: if the cosmos does not cohere to his fantasies, he'd rather it suffer. He is Putin's brother. And so is Craig and Stan and the fake bagpiper and nearly half of all white christianist people.
It's amazing to be in conversation with a proto-fascist in 2022.
And it is also the gutless despot coward who tries to manipulate others to do the erasing for them.
He's still lying about me. I never "willed" to erase feo's alleged marriage. I questioned whether a woman of any race would have him for a husband, and thus don't believe he's truly married. As he lies so often...such as how he's lying now...why would I believe anything he says? But you allow his lying to continue.
As it happens, I've a former co-worker who is white and married to a black woman. She's a wonderful person who is not the "black voice" to which you would lend your ear, but a strong Christian who doesn't suffer fools of her own race any more than of any other. To suggest I have a problem with interracial marriages is just another wish for white-guilt people like the two of you, because you can't really justify your positions.
Now, in another laughable lie, he presumes he's in conversation with me? Or is he attacking you for doing so? Hard to say. He's not as bright as he thinks he is.
Anyway, that's all I have to say about the guy whose character is incredibly low, but more than welcomed by you here.
It's white privilege to be inconsistent. It's white priviliege to believe in oneself so much that if and when whitey takes exception, then the thing is suspect.
The Irish weren't white for 200 years. In the early 20th century, there were signs in eastern cities: NO IRISH NEED APPLY.
Until the Great Migration - really the largest in-country flight from terror in human history. As millions of black folks moved North, THEN the Irish became white. So, too the Germans and the Scandanavians, and, almost, the Italians. It took the Italians another 50 years when Sinatra was invited the Reagan White House at 60 for Italians to be truly accepted as white, again, because whitey was fighting Civil Rights. As they are now. (Sinatra's mother, btw, provided illegal abortions for women in northern New Jersey, of which Frank was very proud.)
This is what white privilege is: this slave dies, this one lives; this slave bears children, this one washes the laundry in a hot cauldron. This Negro is jailed, this one has to live near the incinerator.
Marshal is a bigot. Bigots, because they are sick in the head as Marshal is, are not consistent.
Marshal has said my wife does not exist. He's a racist brutalizer. Sick in the head. Marshal is a Proto-fascist.
And white Christianity has convinced many black folks to speak very nicely in the company of white people. At homee, it's a different story, as black people have been writing and telling us for a very long time.
Wow.
And he’s a stone cold cold liar. He didn’t want my wife to exist because she is black. It’s her blackness he tries to erase. If she were white he wouldn’t care.
Marshal is a proto-fascist racist. His god is Whitey.
In the 21st century, we’re responding to 50 million white racist, fascist Americans.
White privilege is the wife of a Supreme Court Justice in a 39 text barrage imploring the White House Chief of Staff to overturn our Democratic election. If she were black or brown or an Asian, she would be vilified and ruined and so would her husband.
Justice Thomas should for the sake our democracy resign his seat. She poisoned all trust in his serving on the Court.
While I'm waiting, I'm just going to move on to point 2:
"If I should need to move, I can be pretty sure of renting or purchasing housing in an area which I can afford and in which I would want to live."
In what way is this at all unique to any one race more than any other? As one who just signed a lease in another state, we spent a lot of time looking for something acceptable to us. What we couldn't find was one which was affordable in the towns in which I most wanted to live. Indeed, I was pretty sure we would NOT find such accommodations. This is simply a matter of one's own economic condition, and most people seek better than what they have...or at least no worse. This is totally nonsensical as evidence of "white privilege". I wish I could afford Michael Jordan's neighborhood...or Oprah Winfrey's, or Chris Rock's... They're so privileged!!
The list is thus reduced to five points from seven.
Following my hospitalization, I've had a death in the family to deal with. I'll respond here in due time.
Marshal, I will remind you of what I asked you to respond to...
"I've added more data-specific, quantifiable instances of privilege that white folk enjoy by virtue of being white. Deal with those, if you want to comment after you've answered the previous questions."
I've been doing that and no, you added nothing tangible which proves the myth true in any way. And as is plain to see, I've answered your childish questions.
Sorry for your loss and I hope you're healing fully.
Since I've a little time to kill and you're too busy making foolish comments at my blog and Craig's instead of continuing this discussion here, I thought I'd jump ahead a bit to address some further foolishness:
"You (not me, YOU) raised the reality of segregated settings for black people."
No, YOU did in your post with the first of your seven points:
"1. I can if I wish arrange to be in the company of people of my race most of the time."
Mine was a response to that by listing the many opportunities which presently exist for black people to be in the company of other black people most of the time.
"I think you did so thinking you were scoring a point."
No. I did so knowing point number one is not unique to white people and thus not a legit example of the mythical "white privilege".
"But of course, you just pointed to PRECISELY the sort of thing that demonstrates white privilege."
By debunking the myth only white people can choose to be in the company of other those of their own race, but black people can't? Is it white privilege to speak the truth now? Thomas Sowell's in trouble!
"White folks didn't/don't HAVE to create separate churches for themselves, they were/are welcome at any churches.
White folks didn't/don't HAVE to create separate clubs for themselves, they are/were welcome everywhere."
I've never been in or a part of any church or club which didn't allow membership of non-white people. And I've been around for over sixty years...long enough to remember when Democrats still got away with overt discrimination in other parts of the country.
"White folks didn't HAVE to create special educational opportunities for themselves, they've always had opportunity (privilege) to attend better schools."
Not necessarily. In fact, according to Thomas Sowell, there was a time when the test scores of the average black student was on par, and in some cases superior, to white people. This occurred in a period of far more overt racism by Democrats. What's more, there are still cases of poor whites unable to attend better schools.
"And they've enjoyed these privileges for generations, giving whole families a head start that black folks didn't enjoy."
Certainly true for some, perhaps most, but you clearly have to go back in time to push any of these arguments and expect others to pretend that has no bearing on today. It's a pretty lame and obvious trick, but doesn't work. Opportunities abound for all Americans willing to do what's necessary to avail themselves.
The point is that "white privilege" is a myth and holds no water whatsoever in today's America. It exists as an excuse for failing to achieve. "White privilege" is a crappy concept only black people are privileged to use to deflect accountability.
Post a Comment