White Fragility: How racism became invisible to some so it might live forever.

[Axulus]

Because we don't have the wealth, the firepower, or cultural collateral necessary to undermine, overturn, or co-opt the existing power structure. If you see how we can, please enlighten me.

I think I see where you're coming from. All white people are alike, and they've all got my back, because I 'look like' them. Black people as a group, and all individual black people, have no power or authority over any white person.

Suddenly I don't feel fragile at all. I feel powerful, now. Donald Trump has my back.

To be fair, I think she would say that DT endorses or supports the racist system/power structure which gives you and him more opportunities to become rich and powerful because you are both white, a system which removes obstacles from yours and his life that a black person must face.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

You did no such thing. You pretended that pointing out that the majority of people on welfare are white was somehow a refutation to the fact that blacks are more likely to be on welfare than whites.

No, Toni gave facts which are more relevant to the greater context in response to you. ETA: I mean if you're discussing how ending welfare is going to effect people, it is going to effect White people because they are on Welfare, too. Even if it effects just 1, it is still effecting them, but what Toni pointed out is that there are more White people on welfare than Blacks so it is completely relevant. If you try to suggest that having a higher rate within Black population of being on welfare, it really isn't relevant to the point of people's motivations under discussion.

 

[laughing dog]

Can someone explain why there is a discussion about whether black people can be racist is relevant in an OP about white fragility and racism by white people?

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Wrong. Unless you can show me where I said that.

and they've all got my back,

I have no comment on that either way. Maybe all white people will ride or die for you, maybe they won't.

because I 'look like' them.

I don't know all white people, so I could not say.

Black people as a group, and all individual black people, have no power or authority over any white person.

Wrong again. Unless you can show me where I said that, I will not address that. I don't defend things I have not said.

Suddenly I don't feel fragile at all. I feel powerful, now. Donald Trump has my back.

Funny, that's not how you look at all.

One question:

Why aren't the black people who have cultural, legal and economic power over individual whites, and groups of whites, capable of being racist?

Why are the white people who have no cultural, legal and economic power over individual blacks, or groups of blacks, capable of being racist?

What end is served by the 'sociological' definition of racism that, even by its own rules, doesn't even support the very outcome in question, that no black person can be racist?

That's three questions

That you said you would ask one question and then asked three might indicate at least one reason we fail to communicate?

Why aren't the black people who have cultural, legal and economic power over individual whites, and groups of whites, capable of being racist?

Because racism is a group dynamic and an institutional phenomenon. Black people with power can be prejudiced against, can discriminate against, can rape, steal, and kill individual white people and even get away with it, at least for a while. What they can not do change the social hierarchy in ways that under privilege white people and diminish their life chances for generations.

Why are the white people who have no cultural, legal and economic power over individual blacks, or groups of blacks, capable of being racist

White people as a group benefit from white racism. So to continue to argue from the perspective of the individual is not applicable to the discussion at hand. Historically, some "powerless" whites have done the bidding of powerful whites and/or maintained and protected white supremacy by participating in everything from slave patrols to the KKK to mega voting for Bristol Palin on Dancing with the Stars.

"Powerless" whites sit on juries and they vote.

When you look at the effects of institutional racism, you find this

African-American students need to complete two more levels of education to have the same probability of getting a job as their white peers, a new study by Young Invincibles finds.
Structures of racism and privilege continue to put a serious toll on the African American community’s health — and contribute to the fact that black Americans are still dying younger than white Americans.
Black boys as young as 10 may not be viewed in the same light of childhood innocence as their white peers, but are instead more likely to be mistaken as older, be perceived as guilty and face police violence if accused of a crime, according to new research published by the American Psychological Association.

What end is served by the 'sociological' definition of racism that, even by its own rules, doesn't even support the very outcome in question, that no black person can be racist?

To force both sides to look at racism as systemic and systematic, and to see the consequences of the system of racism as something more that random, disconnected acts between individuals that just happen to end toward black people's detriment. To make this not a contest between personalities but a study of a social phenomenon with the goal being to eventually be rid of it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And he shows his face in the video?? There are laws against booby traps and I think that rope would qualify.

The rope could be claimed to be an anti theft device meant to secure it

By itself, maybe (although it's not very effective!) but given how he was gloating about the guys being thrown by the rope it was obviously a booby trap.

 

[Metaphor]

Because racism is a group dynamic

You're begging the question again. All your responses are begging the question.

Why should I accept that racism is a group dynamic?

White people as a group benefit from white racism.

No, they don't. Racism makes everyone worse off.

But if you mean 'racism can benefit individual people while making everyone else worse off', I agree.

So to continue to argue from the perspective of the individual is not applicable to the discussion at hand. Historically, some "powerless" whites have done the bidding of powerful whites and/or maintained and protected white supremacy by participating in everything from slave patrols to the KKK to mega voting for Bristol Palin on Dancing with the Stars.

So let me get this right: I benefit because white people voted for Bristol Palin on DwtS?

What makes you think 'white' people benefitted from that any more than any black person?

"Powerless" whites sit on juries and they vote.

So do black people?

When you look at the effects of institutional racism, you find this

Even if I accept all of these as the outcome of racism, what makes you think white people benefit from it?

Explain to me clearly, in language I can understand: how do I, or 'white people', benefit from a high black unemployment rate?

To force both sides to look at racism as systemic and systematic, and to see the consequences of the system of racism as something more that random, disconnected acts between individuals that just happen to end toward black people's detriment. To make this not a contest between personalities but a study of a social phenomenon with the goal being to eventually be rid of it.

You're begging the question, again.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Possible--except if there were a cause like this wouldn't the medical schools be pointing it out rather than reacting by hiding the data??

What are you talking about?

After they were being attacked by data such as the numbers we are talking about the medical schools quit publishing the data. That says there wasn't an innocent explanation for the data.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

African-American students need to complete two more levels of education to have the same probability of getting a job as their white peers, a new study by Young Invincibles finds.

An AA degree isn't worth all that much, thus this doesn't prove much.

Structures of racism and privilege continue to put a serious toll on the African American community’s health — and contribute to the fact that black Americans are still dying younger than white Americans.

When I follow the link about biases I find it very questionable. The general "bias" against black patients has been identified as being from where the patients were, not what race they were. Go to a doc in an inner city and you're not going to get as good care as in a well off area--no matter what your race. Since a disproportionate number of such people are black it looks like discrimination against blacks.

Black boys as young as 10 may not be viewed in the same light of childhood innocence as their white peers, but are instead more likely to be mistaken as older, be perceived as guilty and face police violence if accused of a crime, according to new research published by the American Psychological Association.

More bad "research"--they used a question that mixes up racism with actual issues.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

You're begging the question again. All your responses are begging the question.

No. They are not. They do presuppose you have done some reading on your own and that you have some academic background in the subject matter. If you do not, let me know and I will explain to you what you ask in terms more suited to a novice.

Why should I accept that racism is a group dynamic?

You should do what you feel best, but the sociological definition still will be accepted and used in both academic circles and by me. If this upsets you, I feel sorry for your pain, but I won't stop or change my use of a definition accepted by experts in the fields of social and cultural study.

White people as a group benefit from white racism.

No, they don't. Racism makes everyone worse off.

If that were true, it never would have existed this long.

But if you mean 'racism can benefit individual people while making everyone else worse off', I agree.

Racism either make everyone worse off or it benefits individual people. It can't do both.

So to continue to argue from the perspective of the individual is not applicable to the discussion at hand. Historically, some "powerless" whites have done the bidding of powerful whites and/or maintained and protected white supremacy by participating in everything from slave patrols to the KKK to mega voting for Bristol Palin on Dancing with the Stars.

So let me get this right: I benefit because white people voted for Bristol Palin on DwtS?

No.

What makes you think 'white' people benefitted from that any more than any black person?

From what? Bristol Palin? I don't and yet she has a following and admirers. I guess there is no accounting for taste. But I digress. Or was that your point?

"Powerless" whites sit on juries and they vote.

So do black people?

And? you asked "Why are the white people who have no cultural, legal and economic power over individual blacks, or groups of blacks, capable of being racist?" They can convict defendants who should go free or release defendants who should go to jail, based of racial beliefs having nothing to do with the facts of the case. They vote in representatives who then gerrymander districts and change voting laws in order to disenfranchise black voters. Black people voting and sitting on juries has what to do with the capability of white people to act in the furtherance of racism?

When you look at the effects of institutional racism, you find this

Even if I accept all of these as the outcome of racism, what makes you think white people benefit from it?

White people have an easier time finding employment and have lower expectations made of them than black people, white people live longer that black people due in part to white people being held in higher regard than black people, white youth are perceived as more likely to be innocent than are black youth of the same age and therefore receive better and less violent treatment at the hands of the police.

Explain to me clearly, in language I can understand: how do I, or 'white people', benefit from a high black unemployment rate?

The way that whites, often unconsciously, hoard and distribute advantage inside their almost all white networks of family and friends is one of the driving reasons that in February just 6.8 percent of white workers remained unemployed while 13.8 percent of black workers and 9.6 percent of Hispanic workers were unable to find jobs

To force both sides to look at racism as systemic and systematic, and to see the consequences of the system of racism as something more that random, disconnected acts between individuals that just happen to end toward black people's detriment. To make this not a contest between personalities but a study of a social phenomenon with the goal being to eventually be rid of it.

You're begging the question, again.

No I am not. If anything I keep giving you credit for knowledge you don't seem to have.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

An AA degree isn't worth all that much, thus this doesn't prove much.

Structures of racism and privilege continue to put a serious toll on the African American community’s health — and contribute to the fact that black Americans are still dying younger than white Americans.

When I follow the link about biases I find it very questionable. The general "bias" against black patients has been identified as being from where the patients were, not what race they were. Go to a doc in an inner city and you're not going to get as good care as in a well off area--no matter what your race. Since a disproportionate number of such people are black it looks like discrimination against blacks.

Black boys as young as 10 may not be viewed in the same light of childhood innocence as their white peers, but are instead more likely to be mistaken as older, be perceived as guilty and face police violence if accused of a crime, according to new research published by the American Psychological Association.

More bad "research"--they used a question that mixes up racism with actual issues.

Loren, do you have anything other than your say so to back up anything you have said so far?

 

[Metaphor]

You should do what you feel best, but the sociological definition still will be accepted and used in both academic circles and by me. If this upsets you, I feel sorry for your pain, but I won't stop or change my use of a definition accepted by experts in the fields of social and cultural study.

Probably the selfsame experts who can make an utterance like 'cis white gay men have cultural access to Black women's bodies and black femmes', and expect the world to accept that the sentence is not just comprehensible, but true.

If that were true, it never would have existed this long.

That's bullshit. Cancer makes everyone worse off and it's existed a long time.

Racism either make everyone worse off or it benefits individual people. It can't do both.

Of course it can. "Everyone" -- as an average, as a group -- is worse off, but individuals could be better off than they otherwise would have been. However, all the benefits that have accumulated to the individuals do not outweigh how much worse off everyone is collectively. Kind of like war.

From what? Bristol Palin? I don't and yet she has a following and admirers. I guess there is no accounting for taste. But I digress. Or was that your point?

Yes, that's my point. How do I benefit from racist white people voting for Bristol Palin solely because she's white?

And? you asked "Why are the white people who have no cultural, legal and economic power over individual blacks, or groups of blacks, capable of being racist?" They can convict defendants who should go free or release defendants who should go to jail, based of racial beliefs having nothing to do with the facts of the case. They vote in representatives who then gerrymander districts and change voting laws in order to disenfranchise black voters. Black people voting and sitting on juries has what to do with the capability of white people to act in the furtherance of racism?

So from the perspective of a juror, everyone can be racist, including black people. Very good.

The way that whites, often unconsciously, hoard and distribute advantage inside their almost all white networks of family and friends is one of the driving reasons that in February just 6.8 percent of white workers remained unemployed while 13.8 percent of black workers and 9.6 percent of Hispanic workers were unable to find jobs[/URL]

Repeating this does not help. How do I benefit from a high black unemployment rate?

Answer: I don't. Nobody benefits. It doesn't make my life better that there is a higher black unemployment rate; it makes my life worse.

No I am not. If anything I keep giving you credit for knowledge you don't seem to have.

Did the ten not-white people on the OJ Simpson jury have any power over OJ Simpson? If they were racially bigoted ('racist', to the rest of us), could this not have affected things? In what way, then, are they categorically excluded from being called 'racist'?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

What are you talking about?

After they were being attacked by data such as the numbers we are talking about the medical schools quit publishing the data. That says there wasn't an innocent explanation for the data.

There's a table for 2013 and also 2014. 2015 hasn't happened yet in full.

 

[Toni]

You're begging the question again. All your responses are begging the question.

Why should I accept that racism is a group dynamic?

Because you are a rational, thinking person.

White people as a group benefit from white racism.

No, they don't. Racism makes everyone worse off.

But if you mean 'racism can benefit individual people while making everyone else worse off', I agree.

You contradicted yourself.

Racism does, in a moral sense, make everyone worse off.

In a practical sense, and in a socioeconomic and political sense, those who belong to any group which is not the object of ARE better off because racism has lessened competition for limited resources: jobs, power.

I agree that society as a whole pays a horrible price for racism but people act in their own self interests and their own short term best interests much more often than they don't. It's not necessarily intentionally screwing over someone else so much as it is myopia. People know what they live. And in a segregated society, one where most of your neighbors and most of your coworkers look like you, come from the same background, went to the same schools, same churches, same clubs, enjoyed the same sports and movies, shopped in the same places you did, you just see very little or nothing at all to challenge any of your ideas or ideals, especially ones you aren't aware you have because why would you ever realize you'd object to having a black boss if it never occurs to you that you might have a black boss. Or black son in law. It's simply not a question that crosses your mind because it's not in your own personal world.

If you are a qualified candidate for a job and belong to the favored group, you have a better chance of getting hired over a similarly qualified candidate because of racism.

In the US, historically, whites had access to better loans, and better rates on those loans, better housing, better jobs, better schools, better hospitals. Because of their race. Because of racism. If you do this long enough, the group of people who are members of the disfavored race are entrenched in the typical result of worse jobs, worse schools, worse medical care, etc. And then you can blame the people of the disfavored race for not being able to compete on the same level. And if you are a special sort of person, you can claim it is because THEIR cultural values keep them down. Not the predominate cultural values established, written and codified into law by members of the empowered group.

That's not even taking into consideration that blacks were almost always slaves in the US in pre-Civil War times, and it was illegal for blacks to be taught to read and write. Emancipation only went part ways to changing this. Jim Crow didn't die for another hundred years. In my lifetime, people have been murdered for daring to register to vote while black. And I'm years away from retirement age.

"Powerless" whites sit on juries and they vote.

So do black people?

Sure they do, despite voter suppression. All those qualified voters from that 13.2% of the population. Majority rules.

When you look at the effects of institutional racism, you find this

Even if I accept all of these as the outcome of racism, what makes you think white people benefit from it?

Explain to me clearly, in language I can understand: how do I, or 'white people', benefit from a high black unemployment rate?

Less competition for jobs. If you are a working class person in the US, you were hit very hard by the recession. We're climbing back out of it but for a long time, competition for jobs was fierce. Still is, in many places. Anything that gives you an advantage benefits you. If, on margin, those making hiring decisions prefer to hire folks that resemble themselves (and research has established as true, even when it is unconscious), and you happen to look more like the hiring manager, you've gotten a leg up. Business people, and hiring managers are conservative people. They want what they know will work. And that means they feel better hiring a new guy who looks a lot like the guy he's replacing.

Now, in the very big picture, of course high unemployment concentrated in any demographic group is bad for society. But people really look at their own personal situation first. See Maslow's hierarchy of need.

To force both sides to look at racism as systemic and systematic, and to see the consequences of the system of racism as something more that random, disconnected acts between individuals that just happen to end toward black people's detriment. To make this not a contest between personalities but a study of a social phenomenon with the goal being to eventually be rid of it.

You're begging the question, again.

Not really.

 

[Metaphor]

You contradicted yourself.

No, I did not. War makes everyone worse off (there is a net reduction in welfare) but individuals could be better off.

Some individuals being better off does not preclude the truth of the sentence 'everyone is worse off'.

Racism does, in a moral sense, make everyone worse off.

In a practical sense, and in a socioeconomic and political sense, those who belong to any group which is not the object of ARE better off because racism has lessened competition for limited resources: jobs, power.

No, they are not.

First, jobs are not a 'limited resource'. If they were, we would see unimaginable unemployment right now as both the number of people in the labour force increased over the 20th century (with women's participation increasing from a small percentage of the labour force to half the labour force), and the time people spend in the workforce increase.

'Power' over others is indeed a more limited resource but power over others is something that many black people have and many white people don't.

I agree that society as a whole pays a horrible price for racism but people act in their own self interests and their own short term best interests much more often than they don't. It's not necessarily intentionally screwing over someone else so much as it is myopia. People know what they live. And in a segregated society, one where most of your neighbors and most of your coworkers look like you, come from the same background, went to the same schools, same churches, same clubs, enjoyed the same sports and movies, shopped in the same places you did, you just see very little or nothing at all to challenge any of your ideas or ideals, especially ones you aren't aware you have because why would you ever realize you'd object to having a black boss if it never occurs to you that you might have a black boss. Or black son in law. It's simply not a question that crosses your mind because it's not in your own personal world.

If you are a qualified candidate for a job and belong to the favored group, you have a better chance of getting hired over a similarly qualified candidate because of racism.

And what makes you think the favoured group is 'whites' in every situation? Or, indeed, white men? My place of employment has active policies that disadvantage men and non-Indigenous people.

Less competition for jobs.

Less competition for jobs makes we worse off, not better. I have only one (full time job). Most jobs in the world I will neither apply for nor would be qualified to do nor would the best person for it. So every time any decision is made that is influenced by something other than merit (wether it's racial bigotry, sexist bigotry, or any one of a million prejudices people have), I LOSE OUT. The economy is worse because other people have made poorer decisions than they could have made.

If you are a working class person in the US, you were hit very hard by the recession. We're climbing back out of it but for a long time, competition for jobs was fierce. Still is, in many places. Anything that gives you an advantage benefits you. If, on margin, those making hiring decisions prefer to hire folks that resemble themselves (and research has established as true, even when it is unconscious), and you happen to look more like the hiring manager, you've gotten a leg up. Business people, and hiring managers are conservative people. They want what they know will work. And that means they feel better hiring a new guy who looks a lot like the guy he's replacing.

So, are there no black people making hiring decisions anywhere in America? Just curious.

Now, in the very big picture, of course high unemployment concentrated in any demographic group is bad for society. But people really look at their own personal situation first. See Maslow's hierarchy of need.

But that's exactly the point. A high black unemployment rate does not benefit me. High unemployment rates benefit nobody. It does not make me better off that some people have made prejudiced hiring decisions. It doesn't benefit anyone.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Can someone explain why there is a discussion about whether black people can be racist is relevant in an OP about white fragility and racism by white people?

By my definition of "white fragility" yes very easily. Some white people are so fragile about racism, so afraid that something they do or say will offend somebody, that they walk on eggshells to the point of accepting that black people can't be racist.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Can someone explain why there is a discussion about whether black people can be racist is relevant in an OP about white fragility and racism by white people?

By my definition of "white fragility" yes very easily. Some white people are so fragile about racism, so afraid that something they do or say will offend somebody, that they walk on eggshells to the point of accepting that black people can't be racist.

If there are multiple ways of defining racism, what difference would it make if the op is discussing one of them? Why should a definition not under discussion in the op become an object of discussion?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Suggesting that a white person's viewpoint comes from a racialized frame of reference (challenge to objectivity);

I had a discussion with a Black person about what Black people should do when police are in the area or when they encounter police. I did indeed assume that my perspective came from a position of objectivity. The person I was having discussion with explained that for Black people it is different what is in their self-interest to do. To simplify: avoiding police has to be considered when you're Black but this is less frequently true when you're White. Eventually, I came to understand that the story of how a person should behave is dependent on some variables including race. It is subjective, not objective. My view and his view both came from a racial frame of reference, except that he already understood my perspective and I did not understand his until we had the dialogue and I learned from it.

 

[Toni]

No, I did not. War makes everyone worse off (there is a net reduction in welfare) but individuals could be better off.

Some individuals being better off does not preclude the truth of the sentence 'everyone is worse off'.

I guess 'everyone' means something different in Australian.

Racism does, in a moral sense, make everyone worse off.

In a practical sense, and in a socioeconomic and political sense, those who belong to any group which is not the object of ARE better off because racism has lessened competition for limited resources: jobs, power.

No, they are not.

Well, sure they are. If you live in a region where there are limited resources: i.e., the world, if you are competing for those limited resources against a smaller number of individuals, you have a competitive advantage. If you are a straight fashion designer who lives in a society where no gay people are allowed to be fashion designers, the competition for any work you wish to do has gotten smaller. Same thing if the disfavored group is people with blue eyes. Less competition = more chance at the job.

First, jobs are not a 'limited resource'.

Sure they are. Limited does not mean stagnant. When you consider that most people seeking jobs are looking for jobs that are within a specific geographic region, it means their job prospects are limited by what is available within that region. Not everyone is free to move wherever jobs are in an unlimited fashion.

If they were, we would see unimaginable unemployment right now as both the number of people in the labour force increased over the 20th century (with women's participation increasing from a small percentage of the labour force to half the labour force), and the time people spend in the workforce increase.

Well, one of the reasons that young adults in the US are unemployed or under employed is because older adults are staying in their jobs longer.

'Power' over others is indeed a more limited resource but power over others is something that many black people have and many white people don't.

Wow. I've explained to you that Obama and Oprah do not mean there is no more racism.

And what makes you think the favoured group is 'whites' in every situation? Or, indeed, white men? My place of employment has active policies that disadvantage men and non-Indigenous people.

Why are those policies in place? Why does it matter if jobs are not a limited resource, as you claim?

Less competition for jobs makes we worse off, not better.

I once got a job because I walked into the place and someone had just quit. I wasn't particularly well qualified but they were in a tight spot and hiring me meant they didn't have to go through the trouble of looking for someone else. I was better off because there was literally no other competition.

Most jobs in the world I will neither apply for nor would be qualified to do nor would the best person for it.

You are therefore not in competition for most jobs. Even within your field, if you have no intention of looking for another position in the foreseeable future, the competition for jobs within your field is reduced by one person.

So every time any decision is made that is influenced by something other than merit (wether it's racial bigotry, sexist bigotry, or any one of a million prejudices people have), I LOSE OUT.

Yes, in a global sense. No one thinks in the global sense when they are hiring or looking for a job. The fact that no one else was applying at that moment for that job I got benefited me greatly, short term. I got the job. It was a terrible job but I was desperate and despite your assertion that jobs are not a limited resource, there were virtually no job openings in the time/place I was looking. It was a college town, and there was a glut of cheap labor. Even openings for very bad jobs with low pay (like mine) did not last long.

In my current position, the year I was applying for jobs, there were many applicants. It took me some months to get hired for my job because there were so many applicants. There was a glut in the job market in applicants with qualifications similar to mine.

A few years later, there was a shortage of qualified applicants. People were being hired very quickly, and for a year or two, with a sign on bonus. My qualifications are similar to or superior to those of coworkers who were hired during this time period. But because there were fewer applicants (the limited resource here), they had less competition for the limited number of jobs offered.

So, are there no black people making hiring decisions anywhere in America? Just curious.

How does that matter? One person within a group having a resource does not mean that all persons within that same group have access to that resource.

Neil Patrick Harris's success does not mean that there is no discrimination against gay men in the US or world. The fact that he is openly gay, and prominent in his industry does help open some doors and break down barriers to employment and acceptance, but it does not eliminate barriers. It takes time.

But that's exactly the point. A high black unemployment rate does not benefit me.

If black people with similar qualifications to yours face a higher burden inn the application process because they are black--i.e., because of racism, you have less competition for the job you seek. Sure, you may pay higher taxes to support the unemployed, but you will be earning more money than you are paying in taxes. You are benefited.

High unemployment rates benefit nobody.

Sure it does. If you are an employer and have positions to fill, high unemployment means you have a larger pool of likely applicants and you can be much more choosy about who you hire. And you can pay them less. You are better off.

Now, not everybody is benefited by high unemployment and the benefits to employers won't last forever, depending on their product because high unemployment means that fewer people can purchase the employer's product. But short term, yeah, it helps the employer a lot. Depending on the business.

It does not make me better off that some people have made prejudiced hiring decisions. It doesn't benefit anyone.

Suppose that you are up for a new position and the application pool is only 4 people with qualifications similar/identical to yours. You are one, two are black, one is a woman. All things being equal--and I've set conditions so that all candidates ARE equally qualified for the job, odds are that the candidate selected would be black, right? Suppose the people in charge of hiring have a bias against blacks and women. You look like a better fit because you are a white man. You are hired. YOU benefit. The company is not worse off because all applicants have similar qualifications. Any of you would have done nicely but they picked YOU because you fit in with their particular world view better than the others. Not because of your qualifications but because of the color of your skin and your gender. For the purposes of this example, 90% of employers seeking workers with job qualifications similar to yours and those of the unlucky 3 who weren't hired also prefer white men over blacks or women. Women and black men seeking those jobs are much worse off. So are those who see them not get hired because of their race or gender because it discourages them in their job seeking and other decision making. They are worse off. But white men are not worse off. They likely don't even realize that they have an advantage because they don't have to think about it. They get hired and of course, people only get hired because they are qualified and are the best person for the job.

Now, over the course of 50 or 100 years, sure, the world is worse off because you were hired due to the prejudices of others. Short term, you are better off because you got the job you wanted. They are worse off because they did not get the job

 

[AthenaAwakened]

You should do what you feel best, but the sociological definition still will be accepted and used in both academic circles and by me. If this upsets you, I feel sorry for your pain, but I won't stop or change my use of a definition accepted by experts in the fields of social and cultural study.

Probably the selfsame experts who can make an utterance like 'cis white gay men have cultural access to Black women's bodies and black femmes', and expect the world to accept that the sentence is not just comprehensible, but true.

I did not post that quote, I have no idea of the its veracity and will not be addressing it.

If that were true, it never would have existed this long.

That's bullshit. Cancer makes everyone worse off and it's existed a long time.

Racism is a human creation within the power of humans to end. Cancer is not.

Racism either make everyone worse off or it benefits individual people. It can't do both.

Of course it can. "Everyone" -- as an average, as a group -- is worse off, but individuals could be better off than they otherwise would have been.

I will remember you said that.

However, all the benefits that have accumulated to the individuals do not outweigh how much worse off everyone is collectively. Kind of like war.

The US became the leading super power in the world and its citizens enjoyed the greatest economic boom in history because of WWII. Not saying War is good, but that history is complicated

From what? Bristol Palin? I don't and yet she has a following and admirers. I guess there is no accounting for taste. But I digress. Or was that your point?

Yes, that's my point. How do I benefit from racist white people voting for Bristol Palin solely because she's white?

I noticed you skipped the references to slave patrols and the KKK. If you agree that those examples are valid, then the Palin throwaway line need not be addressed. Do you agree that the slave patrols and KKK references are valid?

And? you asked "Why are the white people who have no cultural, legal and economic power over individual blacks, or groups of blacks, capable of being racist?" They can convict defendants who should go free or release defendants who should go to jail, based of racial beliefs having nothing to do with the facts of the case. They vote in representatives who then gerrymander districts and change voting laws in order to disenfranchise black voters. Black people voting and sitting on juries has what to do with the capability of white people to act in the furtherance of racism?

So from the perspective of a juror, everyone can be racist, including black people. Very good.

Not what I said and not an answer. Black people voting and sitting on juries has what to do with the capability of white people to act in the furtherance of racism?

The way that whites, often unconsciously, hoard and distribute advantage inside their almost all white networks of family and friends is one of the driving reasons that in February just 6.8 percent of white workers remained unemployed while 13.8 percent of black workers and 9.6 percent of Hispanic workers were unable to find jobs

Repeating this does not help.

No, rejecting answers you don't like doesn't help.

How do I benefit from a high black unemployment rate?

Answer: I don't. Nobody benefits. It doesn't make my life better that there is a higher black unemployment rate; it makes my life worse.

Touching and heroic and loving of the suffering of black people but not relevant to the discussion at hand. As you said yourself

"Everyone" -- as an average, as a group -- is worse off, but individuals could be better off than they otherwise would have been.

If that is true, then so must this be true

"Everyone" -- as an average, as a group -- is better off, but individuals could be worse off [or unaffected] than they otherwise would have been.

WHICH MEANS I need not show how anything affects you personally in order to be valid in stating generalities about groups.

No I am not. If anything I keep giving you credit for knowledge you don't seem to have.

Did the ten not-white people on the OJ Simpson jury have any power over OJ Simpson? If they were racially bigoted ('racist', to the rest of us), could this not have affected things? In what way, then, are they categorically excluded from being called 'racist'?

<sigh> this has what to do with white fragility?

 

[laughing dog]

Can someone explain why there is a discussion about whether black people can be racist is relevant in an OP about white fragility and racism by white people?

By my definition of "white fragility" yes very easily. Some white people are so fragile about racism, so afraid that something they do or say will offend somebody, that they walk on eggshells to the point of accepting that black people can't be racist.

I see, it is an example of white fragility in action. Wow.