[RD] George Floyd and protesting while black

[AmazonQueen]

Statistically speaking in the US, being white is the norm. I really don't know why you feel the need to argue the difference between a privilege and a handicap when the outcome is exactly the same, which we agree on. I was just pointing out that I dislike the insinuation that any accomplishment is automatically tainted jut because of skin color. Blacks (and other minorities) have a disadvantage because of their skin color is a more accurate explanation.
And if you were reading carefully you would not that I was making a personal observation about how felt about it. So your opinion on the matter means squat to me.
Just like my opinion can mean squat to you.

If you go back, you'll note that I made an observation that helped me understand it in a more positive light.
It was others that started arguing the semantics. I continually claimed that the outcome was the same.
So stop being wasteful.

But still you are treated better than others on the basis of skin colour.
Not sure why being the majority makes a difference. The principle is the same in the US, UK or apartheid South Africa.

 

[rah]

But still you are treated better than others on the basis of skin colour.
Not sure why being the majority makes a difference.

Again, I'm not treated better, others are treated worse. (SAME THING)
And being the majority does make a difference statistically speaking when you're dealing with norms.

 

[Estebonrober]

I agree white privilege existed in the past there can be no doubt about that, its factual, I've mentioned this before on these very forums.



I don't come on here enough to know what those particular members beliefs are so I can't really comment on that.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-modern-day-redlining-20180215-story.html

It is still going on, but yes it is less overt.

 

[AmazonQueen]

Again, I'm not treated better, others are treated worse. (SAME THING)
And being the majority does make a difference statistically speaking when you're dealing with norms.

Whether they are being treated worse or you better is as you say the same thing. A disadvantage for them is an advantage for you. Why so reluctant to say it?
It doesn't make a difference to the morality of it.

 

[Syno]

Implying that someone's own argument has discredited itself still requires evidence. I've already provided the evidence why I think you're comments are weak and easily discredited. It reminds me of the episode of the Simpson's where Homer gets into a fight with the garbage men, subsequently the garbage services are cut off, Homer runs for the Sanitizer Commissioners job, during the debate with Commissioner Ray Patterson, Homer offers nothing constructive to the debate, other than cringe worthy cheesy sarcastic jeers and satirical humor, of course the simpletons in the crowd watching the debate find it hilarious, Homer gets elected and of course the garbage service collapses in no time.
You're Homer in this analogy by the way if you didn't already work this out.

Thank you, I think I'm following along. But I'm confused, Modder_Mode! Can you tell me who the simpletons are? I'm afraid my feeble mind cannot grasp such a large idea. Please consider using finger puppets.

Bullying doesn't necessary mean that the individual/individual's being bullied are going to be "run out" or leave the community, a common reason for bullying is to silence opinions you don't like.

You and Manfred should chat privately about organizing your own in-group. You both do this literalist thing where, when faced with the inability to walk the walk, you resort to just picking apart word use and then conveniently never answer the question.

Does your correction, which I am sure is very important, change the sentiment behind my question, making it impossible for you to answer? Surely you can also show us which innocuous beliefs are being silenced, if they are not being run out. It's a common issue here, you claim, so it should be very easy. As you say, truth telling and rational logical discussions are not democratic. Since you self-describe as being a lonely arbiter of The Truth™, we cannot rely on pattern recognition within a group with like-minded beliefs here. You'll have to spell it out. What opinions, which don't harm anyone and don't advocate for suffering or further oppression, are silenced by this community's eager intolerance?

 

[rah]

Whether they are being treated worse or you better is as you say the same thing. A disadvantage for them is an advantage for you. Why so reluctant to say it?
It doesn't make a difference to the morality of it

IF you read my first point, I said that I liked it better because while both terms are correct, I found one offensive. So hearing it the other way made it better for me.
What is so hard to understand about that? If you prefer to use a term that some find offensive, go ahead, but realize that you are choosing to do it.
So for me there is a difference in morality. I'm trying to phrase if in a way that isn't offensive.
Are people claiming that calling it a handicap is offensive? No one has made that point yet.

 

[Syno]

IF you read my first point, I said that I liked it better because while both terms are correct, I found one offensive. So hearing it the other way made it better for me.
What is so hard to understand about that?

Well, it's circular, for one. If you're open to acknowledging that someone else's lot in life is disadvantaged, you're recognizing that your lot is advantaged. Being okay with pointing out the disadvantage but not the advantage seems a bit, eh... weird? I'm not certain how you leap to it being outright offensive. Advantage doesn't mean immunity, so you being labelled as privileged doesn't make it impossible for you to be beaten and arrested, for example. But it does mean that, were you black, your experience being beaten and arrested is likelier to be worse or more common.

The path to equalization is similar if not identical, but I think you're going to run into questioning and challenge because you're saying it's offensive to be told you're privileged due to the colour of your skin. Not that it makes you uncomfortable, or that you feel guilty, or that you think it's blown out of proportion... no, you're saying it's a personal affront against you, an insult, an attack. It smells a little narcissistic, as though you're only reluctantly agreeing to recognize the concept, and only if it's on your terms.

 

[rah]

Ah, now we get down to brass tacks. If Cloud claims a term is offensive to her, I try to the best of my ability not to use that term whether I think it's offensive or not. I agree that I don't get to make the determination of what she finds offensive. I should acknowledge that she does and try not to offend her.
Yet If I find a term offensive you get to say it's not and I'm being a narcissist. That's just plain silly. If you think I'm the only person that finds it offensive, you don't talk to enough people.
I guess I'm not accorded the same protection. Doesn't sound like equality for all to me.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

I agree white privilege existed in the past

What, do you live in a seperate world from the rest of us? It exists to this very day.

I guess I'm not accorded the same protection.

For what? Personal, political beliefs?

 

[AmazonQueen]

Ah, now we get down to brass tacks. If Cloud claims a term is offensive to her, I try to the best of my ability not to use that term whether I think it's offensive or not. I agree that I don't get to make the determination of what she finds offensive. I should acknowledge that she does and try not to offend her.
Yet If I find a term offensive you get to say it's not and I'm being a narcissist. That's just plain silly. If you think I'm the only person that finds it offensive, you don't talk to enough people.
I guess I'm not accorded the same protection. Doesn't sound like equality for all to me.

Do you think that you need to be protected from statements of fact in the same way as people do from terms of abuse?

 

[rah]

For what? Personal, political beliefs?

For having the right to feel offended.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Did they leave because you bullied them or because your debating technique was terrible, they probably got bored and left?

You'll have to ask them. I'm sure you share other forums where you can make contact.

 

[rah]

Do you think that you need to be protected from statements of fact in the same way as people do from terms of abuse?

I think it's critical to show respect if you desire it. You're basically saying that I don't deserve the same respect that you do.
Abuse and finding offense are not the same.

And for the record, there are many "truths" that people find offensive.

 

[AmazonQueen]

I think it's critical to show respect if you desire it. You're basically saying that I don't deserve the same respect that you do.
Abuse and finding offense are not the same.

And for the record, there are many "truths" that people find offensive.

Its true that abuse and finding offence are not the same thing, but I don't accept this idea that we must not say anything that someone else claims to find offensive even if its true.
I wouldn't consider saying someone is privileged to be offensive. Should I avoid saying people who go to an Ivy League university are privileged?

 

[rah]

If they tell you they find it offensive, Yes, if you respect them you should avoid doing it in their presence.
I think it's the ultimate arrogance to decide what other people are allowed to find offensive.
If you don't think others have that right, why should you expect the same treatment.

You do realize that almost 10% of freshman classes at Ivy league schools are blacks and that many of them are there for academic excellence?

 

[El_Machinae]

So, white privilege is not same thing as not having a disadvantage. And I DO think that the overuse of the word 'privilege' slows down the conversation.

So, let's talk pure statistics. If I'm white, it's more likely my parents inherited wealth. Some of that wealth is due to the shared growth that's happened. Some of that wealth is from originating circumstances that were zero-sum. But that distinction isn't even important until the conversation gets deeper. Wealth itself, when talking assets, is zero-sum.

So, because of latent societal bias because can assume I've inherited wealth, they can assume I've had access to education, they can assume that I know how to speak my native language. If any of those things are important to the consideration, I don't have to do the leg-work of showing them I have these things.

So, there are two types of privilege. The fact that I have an education is a privilege that I may or may not have - it's statistically correlated with race. The 2nd is whether I start the interaction with the presumption that I have those advantages. If I don't, they have to figure it out.

It's indistinguishable from how a large and muscled fellow is just presumed to be strong. He'll get that deference until people see him fail out.

There's the other half, "disadvantage", which is also something that other people can be convinced exists: the cop mistreats you based on zero information, the job application goes into the trash bin based on your name, your accent gets on their nerves, etc.

It's easier to convince people of disadvantage than privilege, but since the privilege actually exists, you just need to know what steps are required to get them from understanding the disadvantage to understanding the privilege.

 

[Syno]

Ah, now we get down to brass tacks. If Cloud claims a term is offensive to her, I try to the best of my ability not to use that term whether I think it's offensive or not. I agree that I don't get to make the determination of what she finds offensive. I should acknowledge that she does and try not to offend her.
Yet If I find a term offensive you get to say it's not and I'm being a narcissist. That's just plain silly. If you think I'm the only person that finds it offensive, you don't talk to enough people.
I guess I'm not accorded the same protection. Doesn't sound like equality for all to me.

This is obtuse. Can you pinpoint a term that "offends Cloud" that is as innocuous as being called privileged?

Please reconsider whether or not you'd like to champion the "wealthy white men aren't afforded the same protections as trans people" cause.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

If they tell you they find it offensive, Yes, if you respect them you should avoid doing it in their presence.
I think it's the ultimate arrogance to decide what other people are allowed to find offensive.
If you don't think others have that right, why should you expect the same treatment.

You do realize that almost 10% of freshman classes at Ivy league schools are blacks and that many of them are there for academic excellence?

As opposed to the 90% of freshman classes who are not black, most of whom are there due to family connections.

 

[AmazonQueen]

If they tell you they find it offensive, Yes, if you respect them you should avoid doing it in their presence.
I think it's the ultimate arrogance to decide what other people are allowed to find offensive.
If you don't think others have that right, why should you expect the same treatment.

You do realize that almost 10% of freshman classes at Ivy league schools are blacks and that many of them are there for academic excellence?

So if I called a person with a good income "comfortably off" they can say that's offensive and I shouldn't use it?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I am offended by typewritten words.