White privilege isn't real - Jordan Peterson

Post Reply New Topic

That's outright paranoia, really. And either way, that's a strictly personal decision. Anyone may not like you if you reject them in a personal context like that, but it's totally unreasonable for them to act as if you're wrong for it.

If you were out there preaching that race X shouldn't date race Y, that would definitely be reprehensible. But if you're making choices for yourself, then that's just what it is: you're making choices for yourself. No one else's business.

On the other hand, I think it's worth taking into account the broader context of the way things are today. You don't have the obligation (legal or moral) to do it, and sometimes we just don't have the patience for that, but I think it benefits everyone when we do it. If someone accuses of you racism for rejecting them in a personal context, they're being unreasonable, but they may be seeing it like it's a recurring unfair pattern in life repeating itself again. They're wrong in that case, but it's understandable that they might see it that way. They've been conditioned to it by a lifetime of being treated with unwarranted suspicion. So it's often reasonable to respond to that kind of unreasonableness with tolerance and understanding instead.

Now... There actually are some people who just seem intent on "being the victim" when they actually haven't even been particularly victimized in their life. Those people are better simply ignored. They crave attention, and it's not your obligation to give it to them (and not even a good idea to try to, anyway).


There's a very big difference between personal contexts and more public or formal contexts though, where livelihood may be involved, for example. It's completely unreasonable for the government to control who you should or should not date or break up with, but it's not unreasonable for the government to have some control over who an employer does or doesn't get to employ or fire. Practically all (if not literally all) countries have legal restrictions of that kind (to prevent nepotism, to prevent sick people from getting fired just because they got sick, and so on). When and how exactly labor regulations should or shouldn't account for racial matters, that's a complicated issue. It might be a good idea to some extent, or it might not be a good idea at all. I have no particular opinion on that. But it is a consideration.

Another way of looking at it, which is maybe not as realistic in the short term, but is definitely a better thing in the longer term, is taking measures to improve education for children who currently suffer from a lack of it, and making sure that their children won't be doomed to the same thing in the future. That should be the end goal. In a society where that has been achieved to a reasonable-enough degree, equal respect comes much more naturally, and "affirmative-action"-type measures become redundant.

I think this is really the problem when it comes to this type of debate (or just outright accusation with no debate). Those people fail to make the distinction between a systemic problem and a you problem. It makes very little sense to blame a humble little Word file for a problem in the operating system!

Oh okay those are good points about those emloyment benefits, I agree. Good points.

Another thing is, when it comes when it comes to dating, two black women I asked out over the years, rejected me, which is fine, there right to of course, I'm not complaining . But when they rejected me they didn't just say they were not interested, they responded by saying they only date black guys.

So in that case, do white people also have rejection based on race as well and therefore it's not just a white privilege thing?

If you happen to be particularly interested in black ladies, then... yeah, I guess you're disadvantaged at that. But that's fairly minor compared to employability and life expectancy and such, of course. It's a matter of perspective.

Oh okay, but do non-white people have bigger disadvantaged when it comes to dating though?

It depends on what you consider as "the realm of dating". If you look at it from the perspective of "finding someone you like and who likes you", then probably not. People of all walks of life somehow seem to find that (don't ask me how, I have no idea ). But if you look at it from the perspective of "finding someone to get married and build a prosperous family and forge social connections", then yes, they do have bigger disadvantages.

Last edited by toadsnail on 22 Feb 2021, 4:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Oh okay, what would those bigger disadvantages be?

Well... People who have better connections and better jobs and such won't be as likely to be interested in them.

But that's not everyone's priority when "looking for love". Some people approach marriage as a major focal point for everything in their life, others don't. Some people have more exclusively professional ambitions instead as a way to improve their life (or maintain what's already good about it). So it depends. But either way, if neither is a realistic option for you to improve your life and your life is not that great, then there's a problem. And that's the case for many "non-whites".

The context here as far as I can see is that ironpony was asking if "white privilege" is actually a problem that needs solving or is even "solvable" since other groups have privileges in other parts of the world. To answer that question then I think you need to look at what people actually mean when they talk about "white privilege"; you need to look at all the things that get lumped together under the "white privilege" umbrella by the academics and talking heads who discuss these things.

That's what I meant to say, although I didn't express it well.

Put it this way ... some might say that homeowners have "privilege" inside their own homes. Now if someone gets away with mistreating another person inside their own home, that in itself doesn't imply that "homeowner privilege" is a problem that "needs solving".



Ok, sorry about that. I did not mean it the way I sounded. I must admit I rushed that post in the anticipation that this thread would soon get closed down. I hope in the paragraph above I have better expressed what I meant.



I thought the question we were temporarily focusing on, ironpony's question, was more along the lines of "even if white privilege exists, so what?"

Maybe I have misread ironpony's question, but that is one of the questions I would ask the forum myself.



Well, sorry about that, but I didn't see that, and to be honest often I don't really feel like re-reading an entire thread each time I'm going to post something. If you have already made the point about Sub-Saharan Africa, I'm not sure why you didn't just use the same example again.

Oh what I meant was, is that I feel that there is race privilege of all races in different areas and different cultures but for some reason people only seem to be bothered by it if it's white privilege.

Another example, I can think of is that I am a big movie fan, and people will often be bothered about white privilege in the entertainment industry in the sense that they often complain about how white actors are cast over other actors, or white filmmakers are given advantages over other filmmakers.

One movie example I can think of is when Hollywood remade the Japanese movie Ghost in the Shell, they cast white actors in the major roles, and people complained about this since the filmmakers bought the rights from a Japanese movie and manga source. So a lot of people complained about this.

But when Japan bought the rights from Hollywood to remake Unforgiven, the Japanese filmmakers rewrote all originally white and black characters from Unforgiven, into Japanese characters. No one complained about Japan doing this for a remake. But when white filmmakers do it then it bothers people.

That's just an example of how I feel there are other race privileges out there too, but people only seem to be bothered when it's white privilege.

Indigenous Australians didn't have a vote, at one time.
They do now.

Wouldn't that suggest that 'white' privilege' isn't what it used to be, and wouldn't that apply, generally speaking, across the world?

BTW, What is the difference between an attitude of 'white privilege' and bigotry?

Yes, I think you're right. Both about the particular misunderstanding there and about the nature of the discussion in practice (or the discussion about the nature of the discussion... it gets trippy). I think a big part of the reason for the misunderstanding is that I haven't really been exposed much at all to that idea that "white people are evil". If that kind of attitude exists here, then it's a fringe idea. So I don't automatically assume that's what's being talked about.


I think that analogy doesn't really work though, because black people never chose to be in that house, they just have to deal with the fact that they are there, and that it's "not their house". That's obviously less than ideal in a society that ostensibly values freedom for all. Nobody alive today is directly responsible for that, but someone needs to do something about it.

One could argue that life is unfair and it's just up to them to do something about it themselves. Which is kinda heartless when some of their compatriots are actually in a good and comfortable enough position to do something to improve the situation, but still... that actually is to a large extent how society as a whole works worldwide. How do you determine who exactly should bear the responsibility and how much? It's definitely not a straightforward question. And in the end, life is unfair. Society (any society) is unbalanced, and will always be. *Shrug*.

But, the thing is, when there's active resistance against disadvantaged people lifting themselves up, then there's ongoing responsibility. And that is the real issue in the US today. Not exclusively in the US by any means, but it has reached untenable levels there. And that's bad for everyone, because it means completely avoidable -- but now inevitable -- conflict. And then suddenly it barely even matters who's responsible, because everybody is involved, and so "someone needs to do something about it".

So, essentially, no, race-based privilege is not entirely solvable, not in the foreseeable future at least. But in practice that's not really the point. It's a problem that's getting worse when it really didn't have to, and it's a crisis that needs to be dealt with.


Yeah, I didn't see it that way at first. And it is a good question.


It just feels like nothing is going anywhere when that happens. Question > answer > pretty much the same question > pretty much the same answer. My previous response had been directly to Ironpony already.

I think I owe apologies to Ironpony, by the way. I really had the impression that he was just trying to waste my time (it definitely wouldn't be the first time in this type of discussion...), but I guess he was just being repetitive because he genuinely hadn't understood the answers that had been given, and I in turn didn't see where he was coming from with his thoughts.

Last edited by toadsnail on 22 Feb 2021, 8:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Wow.
Impressively strong stance.

I can't think of a situation in my life where I had an advantage due to my being caucasian.
And I agree that collective guilt is logical nonsense.

'Original Sin' works on the same nonsensical principle.
The so-called collective guilt, in the past, of Jews because they were accused of crucifying JC is another example.

And of course,
The collective guilt of the German 'race' because of the Holocaust is equally an example of irrational emotionalism.

I just don't like to be told to "check my privilege." Save that for the super-rich folks.....who are racialist in thought.

It's almost like a new stereotype is being developed......the "privileged" white person.

The problem I have with certain groups is their 'Selective Outrage' and the hypocrisy which tags along.

This reminds me of Amiri Baraka, previously known as LeRoi Jones, a famous poet, who divorced his white wife because he became a black nationalist.

I would acknowledge that "minorities" were oppressed in the past, and they're being oppressed somewhat these days, too (in a general sense). But I am not one of those who are "privileged," and who are oppressing "minorities." I live in a mostly "minority" neighborhood. Most of my co-workers are "minorities."