Evidence of systemic racism, implicit bias, etc.

Page 3 of 5 [ 76 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 30,594

18 Oct 2022, 4:06 pm

ToughDiamond wrote:
I would say it's normal human behaviour and often a useful survival tool when the individual doesn't have the time to think diligently - but I'm not so sure about the slippery slope. I don't see it as a thing that's in any particular danger of getting worse or more widespread. .


Yes implicit bias evolves from birth, Babies naturally are wary of faces that don't look like their parents. However beyond a certain age it's a learned/conditioned behaviour. Parents reinforce. I've spoken about how I have observed parents in playgrounds (perhaps unconsciously) seeing a child they are uncomfortable with
insert - race
insert - behaviour
insert - physical handicap

They will automatically move their toddler OR intervene pretend to play with their child whereas in reality using their own body as a barrier between them and the other child. This is perhaps natural behaviour from a parent who are protecting their child.

This starts very young, The child learns from observation and this is how confirmation bias starts. As they get older they grow up in a sheltered environment and rely on stereotypes of people who are different which confirms their initial biases they grew up with.

Once the brain is primed to act in accordance to environmental/social cues then all differences from the social norm are treated with suspicion. As a young adult there is cognitive compromise, the individual adjusts their thoughts to what they perceive as "preferences". They prefer/prioritise their social connections based on their learning experiences. This is actually quite normal and we all do this to some extent.



stratozyck
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

Joined: 28 Jun 2022
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 186
Location: US

18 Oct 2022, 7:10 pm

ASPartOfMe wrote:
stratozyck wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
I know what “white privilege” is—I am able to go to the bathroom in restaurants while “minority” folks probably would be excluded from using the bathroom. I can quote a thousand examples, too.

I just don’t believe it’s applicable in many cases. I just don’t feel white folks living in shacks feel “privileged.” There is the assumption by some (and yes, it has been related to me verbatim), that white folks are “privileged” merely by virtue of being white.

I understand the historical aspects of the concept quite well.

I am not a conservative. My political orientation points to European-style “social democracy.”

It has applicability in my case…..but this is of recent vintage. I certainly didn’t feel “privileged” when I lived on rice and paprika for a week……and the many weeks where I was broke while working, and was late on bills, living barely paycheck to paycheck. I worked hard as a young person, and was not the recipient of any “privilege,” owing to my “whiteness.”

What “strawman” are you talking about?

In case you feel I’m some sort of “racist,” let me remind you that I’m married to a black woman, and that my supervisor at work is black, and that I live in a primarily Hispanic and (east) Indian neighborhood.


The strawman is saying you think white privilege is poor whites being privileged economically.

The entire strawman is you are making it out to be about economic wealth.

A great example would be a poor white person smoking pot and not caring about voting for politicians to make it legal because they know the pot laws aren't aimed at them. That is "white privilege" even for a poor white person.

And yes, if you are a poor white person that doesn't worry about the cops arresting you for weed, then YES, that is white privilege.

I never once assumed you were a conservative - I narrowly stated that you defined the concept of white privilege to be something that its not. That was the strawman - you defined it to be something that is not, then easily knocked it down.

No one is saying white people living in trailers are economically privileged. But those same white people can go into a store and not be suspected of being shoplifters - that IS white privilege. And if they were arrested and caught, a judge is likely to go easier on them than if they were black, and a jury would go easier on them if it came to that.

When people keep repeating the mischaracterization then it gives that mischaracterization credibility it shouldn't have. No one is saying that poor whites in trailers are economically privileged. The fact that they hear that - it comes from people repeating the mischaracterization.

If you had said "poor white people misunderstand the concept because it is presented to them in a biased form from media sources with an agenda, so it is dangerous to repeat," then ok. I can get along with that. But thats not what you said, you defined it as economic privilege and worked from there.

The recent (yours) definition of white privilege describes a real problem ass backwards. The problem is that in America white people have a better chance of being treated as they should be or given unfair advantage and non white people have a better chance of being discriminated against.

Privilege implies having things that are unearned or undeserved, a negative when that is often not the problem. Discrimination and prejudice are the problem.

Those white people living in trailers you mentioned they will be profiled if they walked into certain neighborhoods in certain stores. They will also be profiled because of the way they look. Blacks have more of “opportunities” to be profiled but that makes the profiling of the white trailer people less bad because of their “white privilege”?


But if they stormed the Capitol on Jan 6th do they got shot at the gates? You think a bunch of Black people doing Jan 6th would have resulted in any other way other than them being gunned down?

That is what I mean. White people have been storming state capitols and the Bundy ranch thing. You think Black people could get away with that crap?

A poor white trailer park resident can put a gun on his hip and walk into Taco Bell. If you were black - would you dare walk around with a legally allowed pistol? I wouldn't. Hell no. Where I live in Atlanta Georgia, an old white dude walked into the Atlanta airport and carried an AR-15 with a 100 round magazine. Completely legal (look it up, took pictures). Cops didn't do anything. You think a Muslim American would dare do that?

THAT is white privilege. And no, it is not "wealth privilege" which of course exists. OJ Simpson got off because of wealth.

What white privilege refers to is things that generally all white people can get away with - or are more likely to.

Why even bring up "hard cases?" Someone living in a trailer park is just not that common. For the bulk of white people, it definitely does apply. So yes, white privilege does exist, and it does apply to people in trailer parks in many situations, even if it hurts their feelings.

By the way, I lived in a trailer park for 3 years.

Here is white privilege, rural trailer park edition:

When the crack epidemic was going around in the 1980s, politicians were arguing for death penalties for crack. In fact, crack was punished harsher than cocaine for a long, long time.

Meth and opioids were common and rampant in the trailer park I lived in. When it comes to the opioid epidemic, no significant number of politicians are calling for death penalties despite crack being orders of magnitude safer than opioids in terms of overdose deaths.

Don't you kindof think that is white privilege, lower class edition? When whites get hooked on drugs its a medical problem, lets sue the manufacturers! When crack was at its peak, it was "kill them all!!"



stratozyck
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

Joined: 28 Jun 2022
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 186
Location: US

18 Oct 2022, 7:16 pm

kraftiekortie wrote:
Trust me.....people who are seen as being "trailer trash" will be "profiled" in certain areas at least as much as black people are.

Even I've been "profiled" because I used to dress sloppily and, in general, looked disheveled.

My point is----is that it's really "not that simple."

I'm not saying "white privilege" doesn't exist. I'm saying it's not something that's inevitable.



Being profiled doesn't mean you are exempt. Of course you can be profiled! Ever go out in public with a daughter? Some will assume you are a kidnapper.

Its a red herring to wave off the whole thing by saying "poor whites can be profiled, ergo there is no privilege."

No one is saying they can't - what they are saying is that in certain situations - white people in general get more of a pass.

That same trailer park resident could have participated in Jan 6th or other state capitol stormings.

You think Black people would dare do that crap?

I said this in response to someone else, but where I live in Atlanta an old white dude walked into Atlanta airport with an AR-15 with a 100 round magazine - completely legal in Georgia.

You think an Arab American would do that? That is white privilege. It has nothing to do with economic situation. A trailer park resident can go buy that on credit and go walk into Atlanta airport with a weapon on their shoulder and not worry. A similarly poor Black American wouldn't even consider doing that because they know what would happen.



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,167
Location: Queens, NYC

18 Oct 2022, 8:14 pm

Where did I say there wasn't "white privilege"? I never denied the existence of "white privilege."

All I said is that "white privilege" isn't inevitable.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 30,594

18 Oct 2022, 8:38 pm

kraftiekortie wrote:
All I said is that "white privilege" isn't inevitable.


And that's what Tucker Carlson and members of the GOP are stoking fear about. It might be worth watching the Charlottesville riots several years ago and listen to the chants (Jews will not replace us). There is a clear intersection there with the GOP today and their obsession with the great replacement theory.



ToughDiamond
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2008
Age: 70
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,828

18 Oct 2022, 9:29 pm

cyberdad wrote:
ToughDiamond wrote:
I would say it's normal human behaviour and often a useful survival tool when the individual doesn't have the time to think diligently - but I'm not so sure about the slippery slope. I don't see it as a thing that's in any particular danger of getting worse or more widespread. .


Yes implicit bias evolves from birth, Babies naturally are wary of faces that don't look like their parents. However beyond a certain age it's a learned/conditioned behaviour. Parents reinforce. I've spoken about how I have observed parents in playgrounds (perhaps unconsciously) seeing a child they are uncomfortable with
insert - race
insert - behaviour
insert - physical handicap

They will automatically move their toddler OR intervene pretend to play with their child whereas in reality using their own body as a barrier between them and the other child. This is perhaps natural behaviour from a parent who are protecting their child.

This starts very young, The child learns from observation and this is how confirmation bias starts. As they get older they grow up in a sheltered environment and rely on stereotypes of people who are different which confirms their initial biases they grew up with.

Once the brain is primed to act in accordance to environmental/social cues then all differences from the social norm are treated with suspicion. As a young adult there is cognitive compromise, the individual adjusts their thoughts to what they perceive as "preferences". They prefer/prioritise their social connections based on their learning experiences. This is actually quite normal and we all do this to some extent.

Ah, I guess that by the "slippery slope" you mean child development over time and parental influence? I don't doubt that the scenario you describe happens, and that parental xenophobia tends to reinforce or replace the child's original xenophobia, at least to the degree that the child internalises the parents' attitude towards the unfamiliar.

Perhaps luckily for me, my parental nest was somewhat dysfunctional on the emotional level, which made me rather a rebellious black sheep, so I've seen first-hand that a lot depends on the degree of internalisation, and I think even in the most close-knit families all the parents can hope for is to clone their social attitudes into their offspring, and that although racism tends to reproduce itself, it seems unlikely that it amplifies down the generations. I've heard that racism is stronger in older people in the UK, and I think there's some truth in that.

What interests me most are the questions (1) why anti-racism has failed to achieve as much as it hoped, and (2) what changes the activists might make to their methods in order to more successfully ease racial tensions. There doesn't seem to be much information about those matters on the web - most of what I see is activists doing more of the same and xenophobes pushing back the other way.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 30,594

18 Oct 2022, 9:53 pm

ToughDiamond wrote:
What interests me most are the questions (1) why anti-racism has failed to achieve as much as it hoped, and (2) what changes the activists might make to their methods in order to more successfully ease racial tensions. There doesn't seem to be much information about those matters on the web - most of what I see is activists doing more of the same and xenophobes pushing back the other way.


Oh I can give some easy answers to your questions. Systemic privilege benefits those who control society. While society is diverse (insert - multicultural, nuerodiverse, physical diversity etc) the straight white English speaking NT males (SWENT males) self-identify themselves the controllers. Despite the illusion of a level playing field, the SWENTs control social and economic hierarchies to ensure they retain power where it matters.

There is no illumunati or secret society, it's just the same people who ruled the world in the colonial era who now run countries across post-colonial transnational borders.



ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 30,437
Location: Long Island, New York

19 Oct 2022, 1:16 am

stratozyck wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
Trust me.....people who are seen as being "trailer trash" will be "profiled" in certain areas at least as much as black people are.

Even I've been "profiled" because I used to dress sloppily and, in general, looked disheveled.

My point is----is that it's really "not that simple."

I'm not saying "white privilege" doesn't exist. I'm saying it's not something that's inevitable.



Being profiled doesn't mean you are exempt. Of course you can be profiled! Ever go out in public with a daughter? Some will assume you are a kidnapper.

Its a red herring to wave off the whole thing by saying "poor whites can be profiled, ergo there is no privilege."

No one is saying they can't - what they are saying is that in certain situations - white people in general get more of a pass.

That same trailer park resident could have participated in Jan 6th or other state capitol stormings.

You think Black people would dare do that crap?

I said this in response to someone else, but where I live in Atlanta an old white dude walked into Atlanta airport with an AR-15 with a 100 round magazine - completely legal in Georgia.

You think an Arab American would do that? That is white privilege. It has nothing to do with economic situation. A trailer park resident can go buy that on credit and go walk into Atlanta airport with a weapon on their shoulder and not worry. A similarly poor Black American wouldn't even consider doing that because they know what would happen.


BLM demonstrators were not being massacred at the gate. The 1/6 rioters are not exactly getting away with it most are in or going to prison, unlike most BLM rioters.
Off Topic
I am 65 year old white guy that walks with a cane. Prior to 1/6 but in a post-9/11 world if I was unauthorized
I would have fully expected to be shot up to pieces before I got to the top of the steps. How do they know I do not have a big time bomb? Had to be some sort of inside knowledge. I am not talking about individual cops but Capital Police leadership and above. I am surprised the 1/6 committee has not delved into this more. They should have been treated the same way Lincoln treated the Confederates. If there was an inside job was it race, was it partisanship, or was it like Uvalde where they were so scared they froze? Not being shot while storming the Capital was a privilege


I used trailer people being profiled to argue against the idea that no matter what because you are white you are automatically privileged.

If those same hypothetical trailer residents were not profiled IT IS NOT A PRIVILEGE, IT IS BEING TREATED FAIRLY.


_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman


kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,167
Location: Queens, NYC

19 Oct 2022, 6:04 am

Yep….It’s almost certain that 1/6 was partially an “inside job.” I’m surprised they didn’t look into this further.

In general, “minorities” have more disadvantages than white people in the US—but there are plenty of white people who don’t share the “glory” of being “privileged.”

The “white privilege” theory is too simplistic—like Marxism and trickle-down economics are too simplistic.



MuddRM
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

Joined: 2 Sep 2021
Gender: Male
Posts: 236
Location: Beautiful(?) West Manchester Township, PA

19 Oct 2022, 6:52 am

ToughDiamond wrote:
^
I think I'd like the term "white privilege" dropping altogether. We've already got "systemic racism" which seems to cover it. The problem with the term "white privilege" is that whatever it's intended to mean, it probably doesn't go down well with white people who feel downtrodden themselves. It smacks of "you whites don't know you're born, you should try being black and then you wouldn't complain so much." I'm not saying it's deliberately been coined to have that effect, but the whole racism problem is a thorny issue and I don't think race equality activists always understand enough about how their words come over to people, so they won't win over the hearts and minds of the people they need to convince.


Note to admins: please do not tag for deletion or even to have me banned. The following is what I always heard about me, my family, and most of my relatives growing up in “Pennsylvania Dutch Country.”

Have you ever heard the term “white n!gger?” That perjorative has been used against me, my brothers, my parents, and some of my relatives while I was growing up. No matter how hard we studied or worked, we were white n!ggers, primarily because we grew up in a town that was considered to be “the sewer of York County.”

I may not be the brightest bulb out there, but that kind of discrimination is not called for. Unless you’ve done something to me that p!sued me off, I don’t even bother looking a race. In short, you leave me alone, and I’ll leave you alone.



League_Girl
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2010
Gender: Female
Posts: 27,102
Location: Pacific Northwest

19 Oct 2022, 11:36 am

kraftiekortie wrote:
Yep….It’s almost certain that 1/6 was partially an “inside job.” I’m surprised they didn’t look into this further.

In general, “minorities” have more disadvantages than white people in the US—but there are plenty of white people who don’t share the “glory” of being “privileged.”

The “white privilege” theory is too simplistic—like Marxism and trickle-down economics are too simplistic.


What do you mean by inside job? Those who are not in denial know this was planned by Trump and all these people that stormed the capital were misled and were made to believe they had to do it or they were letting him down and their country. They were duped. I don't know if I should feel sorry for them or think they deserved it for being stupid in the first place when it had been obvious from the start but chose to keep their heads in the sand. I watched part of the trial and some of these people testified so that is how I know this.


_________________
Son: Diagnosed w/anxiety and ADHD. Also academic delayed.

Daughter: NT, no diagnoses.


ToughDiamond
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2008
Age: 70
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,828

19 Oct 2022, 11:58 am

MuddRM wrote:
ToughDiamond wrote:
^
I think I'd like the term "white privilege" dropping altogether. We've already got "systemic racism" which seems to cover it. The problem with the term "white privilege" is that whatever it's intended to mean, it probably doesn't go down well with white people who feel downtrodden themselves. It smacks of "you whites don't know you're born, you should try being black and then you wouldn't complain so much." I'm not saying it's deliberately been coined to have that effect, but the whole racism problem is a thorny issue and I don't think race equality activists always understand enough about how their words come over to people, so they won't win over the hearts and minds of the people they need to convince.


Note to admins: please do not tag for deletion or even to have me banned. The following is what I always heard about me, my family, and most of my relatives growing up in “Pennsylvania Dutch Country.”

Have you ever heard the term “white n!gger?” That perjorative has been used against me, my brothers, my parents, and some of my relatives while I was growing up. No matter how hard we studied or worked, we were white n!ggers, primarily because we grew up in a town that was considered to be “the sewer of York County.”

I may not be the brightest bulb out there, but that kind of discrimination is not called for. Unless you’ve done something to me that p!sued me off, I don’t even bother looking a race. In short, you leave me alone, and I’ll leave you alone.

Yes I know the term - it's in the song "Oliver's Army" (Elvis Costello), which I've performed myself a few times at the risk of objections from those who feel strongly that nobody should ever utter the N-word. Here it is, at the end of verse 2:

https://genius.com/Elvis-costello-olivers-army-lyrics

Here's a bit about the contoversy over the risky word:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tva ... yrics.html

The author seems to have redacted the song in 2022, though I don't know why. He's announced he won't perform it again and has asked radio stations to stop playing it.

Your post reminds me of the notion that anti-racism and feminism, while very important, are merely sub-categories of the more important ethic of egalitarianism. I've very strongly suspected for many years that a preoccupation with only one sub-category of egalitarianism is ultimately futile, and that if there's ever going to be any progress, we have to see the bigger picture and take all the sub-categories on board.



ToughDiamond
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2008
Age: 70
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,828

19 Oct 2022, 12:48 pm

cyberdad wrote:
ToughDiamond wrote:
What interests me most are the questions (1) why anti-racism has failed to achieve as much as it hoped, and (2) what changes the activists might make to their methods in order to more successfully ease racial tensions. There doesn't seem to be much information about those matters on the web - most of what I see is activists doing more of the same and xenophobes pushing back the other way.


Oh I can give some easy answers to your questions. Systemic privilege benefits those who control society. While society is diverse (insert - multicultural, nuerodiverse, physical diversity etc) the straight white English speaking NT males (SWENT males) self-identify themselves the controllers. Despite the illusion of a level playing field, the SWENTs control social and economic hierarchies to ensure they retain power where it matters.

There is no illumunati or secret society, it's just the same people who ruled the world in the colonial era who now run countries across post-colonial transnational borders.

You mean anti-racism has made no progress because we haven't eliminated the ruling class? I wouldn't be surprised if it were so.



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,167
Location: Queens, NYC

19 Oct 2022, 1:01 pm

"Inside job" = It seems like elements of the Capitol Police were involved. How else would the rioters had such access to the Capitol?

If full security was in force, I doubt that the rioters would have gotten within 1 block of the Capitol.

It's pretty obvious that Trump was an instigator, and probably would have been a participant had he been allowed to go back to the Capitol.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 30,594

19 Oct 2022, 4:10 pm

ToughDiamond wrote:
You mean anti-racism has made no progress because we haven't eliminated the ruling class? I wouldn't be surprised if it were so.


And we probably never will. The only consolation is I would rather have that group ruling us than a conglomeration of authoritarian dictators from Russia-China-North Korea



ToughDiamond
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2008
Age: 70
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,828

19 Oct 2022, 5:30 pm

cyberdad wrote:
ToughDiamond wrote:
You mean anti-racism has made no progress because we haven't eliminated the ruling class? I wouldn't be surprised if it were so.


And we probably never will. The only consolation is I would rather have that group ruling us than a conglomeration of authoritarian dictators from Russia-China-North Korea

Indeed. The adage about no country being more than x square meals away from revolution (where x is a small integer) looks hopeful on the surface of it, but history seems to show that the vacuum only gets filled by another set of sociopaths who are even worse, with the possible exception of Cuba, and even that's debatable.

Now that I've given up all hope, I feel much better.