Douchebags - An article everyone should read :)

Post Reply New Topic

You don't seem to understand what the term white privilege refers to if you think the term is racist.

It refers to the idea that there are certain things that many minorities experience in their day-to-day existence that are utterly foreign to white people across social strata. To point this is out not racist; to deny this this is absurd. Being blind to the realities of someone else's existence doesn't make those realities cease to exist.

Privilege is relative and specific to the individual. Sasha and Malia Obama are privileged, I am not. I find it pretty ridiculous that anybody would say that I am inherently privileged and I imagine you would as well, this isn't just because of any affliction we might have to deal with either which certainly hasn't helped. I was born in one of the poorest major cities in the US, I went to public schools, I lived in bad neighborhoods, when I wore clothes from thrift stores it wasn't a fashion statement. I'm not some tourist college Marxist, I've lived the life and it wasn't by choice. Growing up where I did I'd say I honestly probably faced more personal discrimination from my peers because I was white than I would of if I wasn't. There are just as many whites living in poverty in this country as there are minorities yet they don't get recognized to any real degree and face constant derision by these so called progressives in ways these same progressives would call racist if it was directed at minorities.

I can sympathize with poor minorities on a lot of things but I'm also a realist and don't believe in this self-hating noble savage/magic negro fantasy so many of these supposedly so learned progressive types seem infected with. I'm not denying there is racism or oppression of minorities in this country at all but it comes in many forms and minorities nowadays lack almost any constructive cultural critique which is honestly the most racist thing of all, the term the soft bigotry of lowered expectations come to mine. They don't truly believe in equality like they say they do. They excuse bad behavior because deep down they can't expect anymore out of lesser people, they think they're helping but they're not. White guilt is also very real amongst these people and they think by supporting what they support that they're cleansing themselves of that guilt, you see they're not one of those bad white people. Those guys are douchebags!

You have to wonder why these folks are always so dumbfounded by why they struggle in selling their ideas to the white majority in this country, this dumbfoundedness only compounds the hatred they direct towards them. A lot of these supposedly learned individuals don't seem too smart, they may go to a university but they're ignorant and the truly dumb see these degrees(often times totally useless) as validation when all they do is regurgitate whatever their Marxist professor teaches them like Islamic jihadists do from some radical cleric. They're all but pawns in a game. Racial politics is disgusting.

P.S. before anybody does it, please don't fisk me if you want to engage me. Just respond to the whole post, address every point if you have to. I don't like playing that stupid game.

Last edited by Jacoby on 07 Nov 2014, 5:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Well I cannot entirely complain about the way douchebag was used in the article, that is a perfect word for the people it describes considering what a douche bag actually is. However I would disagree that only a white person could be considered a douchbag are all rich snobs white? doubtful. Also I have seen lots of people who aren't white who are more well off than white people and vice versa, wealthy white people have privilege, being white does not automatically give you any real privilege. homeless white people who aren't able to shower often enough get treated like crap regardless of what color they are....so I feel the article really simplifies it al l too much and makes race the biggest thing when discrimination is not limited to that. I guess I don't get why it is called 'white privlege' when its not only white people who end up with what they refer to as white privlege, I think its just douchbaggarry and the fact its not only white people striving to be douchbags, its probably not even mostly white people. Also I think the term white privilege could unintentionally also turn people away from actually looking at the issues it referrs to, which seem to be much more complex than anything that could be simply called 'white privelage' so I guess I don't get that bit.

Also I really don't know anything about elliot rogers I am not big on following all the details of school shootings, so admittedly I didn't entirely get how that tied into the whole thing, except that he'd be an example of someone who committed a mass shooting in a rage of hatred.

Also the bit about all white people being racist and not knowing it and b*tching about hipsters was more about the article that was linked in the article the OP posted, in the part where it says something about 'ironic racism' and if you click that it links you to the following:
link
but maybe the author did not intend that, not sure. Did seem a bit odd they seemed to give kind of a postiive analysis and then there was what that article contained.

I went to college, dropped out though...but never had a marxist professor, there was a lot of stuff that was taught in classes that I questioned and came to the conclusion it was BS, though I did learn some interesting things no real practical skills or anything though. But I certainly do not think going to college makes people 'smart', seems college is more about social status and trying to make social connections to 'hook you up' when you graduate, if you fail to do that but truly care about getting an education and do well the person with lesser grades but with better social connections is probably more likely to get a job in your desired field than you. My moms boyfriend for instance thinks he's super smart because he went to college but he's really irrational about a lot of things, and can't even admit to making a mistake.

I never grew up privileged either, even still most of my wardrobe is thrift store clothes....or stuff I've found on sale at places normally out of my budget for the most part, obviously I like to find things that I like the look of but for cheap so I can afford it. Also my family was on food stamps when I was a kid...so yeah I certianly don't feel there is any white privilege in my situation.

White privilege doesn't mean everything will be easy because you're white it means there are certain challenges you will never face due to being white.

Men don't have to deal as heavily with their value as a person being determined in some people's eyes by their attractiveness. Men for the most part don't have to worry about the possibility a larger date will try to coerce sex acts from them through threat of physical force. (For two examples) All these little things added up are the basis of male privilege. They don't make men bad people, men don't consciously choose to take advantage of them and often aren't even aware of them.

The same principles can be applied to assessing the dynamics that exist for members of any dominant group.

The whole 'x privilege doesn't exist because I personally can't think of a way I've benefited' is a bit of an flawed way of thinking. Usually we're not aware of hurdles we've never faced, only the ones we have. x privilege is largely an issue of hurdles not being there.

I am truncating your post rather than Fisking.

I think much of what you say is frankly rubbish, though maybe you accidentally missed out some crucial words or used one word when you meant another (in particularly you seemed to use "minority" and "progressive" somewhat interchangeably).

Ultimately I think the issue is that you don't understand "white privilege". I think "privilege" puts people on the defensive a bit - maybe "white benefits" would be a better term? It doesn't mean that white people (or men or heterosexuals or cissexuals or whatever) are treated like royalty, but that they don't experience institutional racism. If you or I have a brush with the law it is more likely that it will remain a brush than if we were black. We'll be more likely to be let off, and receive better treatment at all stages. We'll also find it easier to get hired, based solely on our names.


Relevance? Zero. In fact, your second sentence is irrelevant to your first (All As are B, some Cs are B - no contradiction)

Don't you consider yourself something of an intellectual?

And I'd be curious as to what those exact challenges are, also I cannot say it doesn't exist....but not all white people are benefiting from this 'privalege'. It just seems most of the time when people bring up that term, the challenges they mention that white people aren't dealing with are largely poverty issues, maybe those people are misrepresenting what the term white privilege means but its the impression I've gotten since that is what usually is discussed in relation to the term. But maybe its different challenges, though I also know depending on area there are certainly places where white people could face discrimination and racism from people of other races.

Also I thought essentially white people are a minority in the world, so does white privilege apply in all continents/countries or is it more of a U.S issue? But then is the majority of the U.S white anymore.....if not how would it be the 'dominant group'? But yeah I am really just trying to understand the concept better.

What does that mean, intelligence is to be questioned if one disagrees with the notion all white people are racist? I'd think the intellectual approach would acknowledge that people who aren't white are capable of racism.

It's a superfluous distinction, if one form of privilege exists then an infinite amount of them exist to the point that you can only judge a person individually. What point is there making such a generalization? I used Sasha and Malia Obama as an example of why it doesn't make much sense as a blanket statement. You "privilege checkers" are your own worst enemy, you're implying that I am at fault for something I have no hand in and that I get some benefit that I do not deserve and I disagree on both points. It places the blame for society's ills towards minorities and all of their struggles squarely on the shoulders of white people specifically straight white men. Don't you see how insulting that is?

No, it means non sequiturs, straw men and irrelevant points are stupid.

I happen to agree with Fnord that the remark he posted is highly prejudiced. I also agree with him that people with darker skin can be racially prejudiced. It's just that the author of the article posted didn't claim or imply otherwise. Nobody in this thread has claimed or implied otherwise. Furthermore, "some dark skinned people are racist" does not contradict "all white people are racist", so Fnord didn't even knock down the straw man. He could have said "everyone is racist, regardless of skin colour, so singling out white people is silly", or "not all white people are racist" or something along those lines, but he didn't.

The examples The Walrus brought up are good, If you or I have a brush with the law it is more likely that it will remain a brush than if we were black. We'll be more likely to be let off, and receive better treatment at all stages. We'll also find it easier to get hired, based solely on our names.

Certainly, the notion of dominance can be relative. A white kid growing up in a mostly black community might be the victim of racist treatment, undeniably. But, if he goes two towns over he's likely to be free of that situation. The black people victimizing him may also be victims of the surrounding neighbourhoods victimizing them, and are less likely to be able free themselves from the situation by travelling. Being mistreated doesn't justify their mistreatment of the initial kid, but there are undeniable differences between the nature of the situation for the different sets of victims.

Dominance isn't always simply about numbers. The Spartans were greatly outnumbered by their helot slaves, but were undeniably the dominant group. Economic prosperity along with the lingering effects of imperialism meant the west's dominance was once undeniable. This isn't absolutely true today, but for the most part the west and 'westerners' still dominate the world.

I know your implication is to say that I am racist there which is fine since my post was just a long winded way of calling you a racist as well but how I used the term minority and progressive weren't interchangeable at all in that post. Minorities can be progressives but they're not mutually exclusive, I think it was pretty clear in my post that it was primarily directed at elitist white progressives specifically college aged ones.

I believe there are some people of all so-called "races" who are "racist" in the usual sense of the word (i.e., that they believe in stereotypes based upon a "race").

To me, there are no "races." There are just people with different ancestries, some of whom have a different skin color than others. The skin color is based upon how much melanin is present. It's an adaptation to the presence or relative absence of sunlight.

There are "cultures." Therefore, there are "ethnic groups."

The underlined is flat-out wrong, I have quite clearly stated that the opposite is the case more than once.

It's not your fault or my fault we benefit from white privilege. That said, we've done nothing to earn it except for being white.
No one's saying you're bad because your life is easier as a white person than it would be if all other circumstances were identical but you were born not-white. They're just saying you should be aware of this and not pretend like it's not the case. It's not your fault things are the way they are, but you can at least not insist on denying reality.

Sasha and Malia Obama get all sorts of privilege for being rich and being the daughters of the president, but if they go in a store and aren't recognized they get treated like any other black teenagers, you and I don't.

Acting butthurt because as a straight white male the playing field is slopped in our advantage and people are pointing this out only demonstrates an inability to see the world from perspectives that aren't your own.

You're ignorant and cast blame whether you say you are or not, people that do racist things and discriminate are responsible for their own actions not me. I don't get something I don't deserve, I'm not benefiting at someone else's expense. People that are discriminated against are victims by specific action, one can discriminated against for an infinite amount of reasons and sometimes it is done racially. Someone being denied their rights doesn't mean that I benefit from privilege, it just means that person was denied their rights. You can't make a blanket statement saying all these people have it easier than all these other people when it straight up isn't true, we're all at varying levels. You can't blame all of the problems in the minority community on "whites" as if they're monolithic group.

FWIW I can guarantee you Sasha and Malia Obama would be treated better than I would stepping into any store than I would but I'm not your typical khaki short sandle wearing tucked in button up shirt guy you might picture when you say "white privilege" tho. I don't mean any offense by this but judging by your picture, I'd say you'd probably be in the same boat.

"Privilege checkers" are just cancerous to their own cause with their hateful rhetoric if their goals truly lie in equality.

I categorically deny that I was trying to imply that you are racist. Nothing I have seen in your posts in this thread leads me to believe you are any more racist than most good people.

I was particularly confused by this extract, and particularly the first sentence:

Whilst it would seem like this is something you would aim at a privileged phony progressive, the pronouns are a bit muddled and it seemed like you were actually aiming it at minorities.