Privilege and the 200 points

[Arctish]

If that's what you believe, why did you say "whoop ass"? Clearly you are once again quoting Rachel Jeantel, and she uses the term to mean defending one's self if attacked and in fear for your life.

There is nothing within the definition of the term "whoop ass" that indicates defensive whooping only. In fact, Meriam Webster defines "whup" as
1: to administer a beating to especially as punishment
2: to defeat decisively
Examples of WHUP
His father whupped him for swearing.
Our team got whupped in last night's game.
Not a word about self defense.

I agree both blacks and whites have the right to self-defense. But just because somebody is black and unarmed doesn't mean they weren't the aggressor.

I never said being unarmed means a person could not have been the aggressor. That's a strawman argument.

We're talking about blacks doing ordinary things like walking home from a 7-11 and being targeted for an aggressive action, such as armed pursuit, merely because they're black. It's an enormous problem, and something we should not tolerate in a society that proclaims all persons are created equal and have inalienable rights.

The rest of my response to you is a bit of a derail. I'm putting it behind the HIDE tab so this budding side discussion doesn't clutter up the thread any more than it already has.

Show

You are applying your preferred definition to a term that has more than one meaning in different dialects, and insisting the term can only mean what you say it means. The result is a misrepresentation of what was actually said.

I'm sure by now you understand that when you use a term and quote a specific person using it, you signal to people reading your posts that you are using the term as the quoted person uses it. If you write about "evolution", and link to Ken Ham talking about it, it is understood you mean "evolution" as Ken Ham defines the term. If you link to Bill Nye using the word, it is understood you mean "evolution" as Bill Nye defines it. If you quote Neil DeGrasse Tyson speaking about stellar "evolution", it is understood you mean "evolution" as Tyson means it. If you post about "evolution" and link to an episode of Pokémon, it is understood you are talking about what happens in a Japanese anime. To the reader, what you mean when you use the word depends on the source you quote to explain it. If you screw up the quote, and accidently link to Ham when you meant to cite Nye, the result is confusion and misunderstanding.

Also, when there is a difference in dialect, the meaning of a word or phrase can be wildly different. I know a guy who was served jambalaya in England, and the cook wanted to know what he would suggest to improve it. He said it was pretty good already but maybe it could be "spunked up" a bit. The English were aghast. My friend was confused by their reaction until someone told him that in British slang the word "spunk" means the same thing as the American slang term "splooge".

What you have been doing by implying Jeantel said Martin attacked Zimmerman is the equivalent of saying my friend suggested the cook ejaculate into the soup pot. He did nothing of the sort, and Jeantel did not say Martin was the aggressor. She said he was defending himself.

I'm going to be perfectly frank with you here. I think you know exactly what Jeantel meant, and I think what you are doing is a hair's breadth away from outright lying. I believe you are deliberately misrepresenting her meaning because you think you're fooling someone, and you think it's fun to do. Well, fun or not, it serves no good purpose to mislead people, which is why I keep calling you on it.

 

[Sabine Grant]

Thank you so much Arctish for being sensitive to avoiding a derail.

But going back to :

Originally Posted by thebeave :
I think Athena's message about white privilege is finally sinking in. I'm seeing more and more white self-loathing out there. Here's a couple of examples:

http://www.campusreform.org/?ID=6097

http://www.campusreform.org/?ID=6069

Hopefully, within just a few years, we'll have most white men wake up everyday, stare in the mirror in the morning and cry, " I hate you, I hate you, I hate you!! Oh, why did I have to be born white?! I'm so ashamed of myself! I can't even look at a brown person in the eye without sobbing uncontrollably!"

Keep up the good work AA!! You're almost there!

The above IMO is a misunderstanding of Athena's intent. I have seen her intent (and for a long time now) as an endeavor to bring about awareness. Not awareness so that "white men wake up everyday, stare in the mirror in the morning and cry, " I hate you, I hate you, I hate you!! Oh, why did I have to be born white?! I'm so ashamed of myself! I can't even look at a brown person in the eye without sobbing uncontrollably!", rather one with the hope that members of the White ethnic majority group go against the current or flow of negative stereotypes targeting her own ethnic minority group. Her Mother Jones list portrays some of those negative stereotypes and how they unfortunately will govern how so many of us as White persons will respond or react to members of her ethnic minority group.

The "young Black man walking" triggering fear or/and the assumption that such person can only be planning to commit a crime or is a thug is an undeniable reality. So often, a young Black male will be viewed as suspicious just because he is a young Black male. Is it not our responsibility as members of the White ethnic majority to attempt to go against such mentalities? Is not the change to come from the inside out and motivated by some of us?

I certainly need not to "loathe" myself to be someone who is aware and has no issue going against that current or flow of negative stereotyping targeting Black persons. I come close to doing it on a daily basis. There is not a day when I do not encounter a comment made by some people in person and face to face, the content of which reflects a negative assumption (stereotype fueled) on the account of a person(or persons) of Black ethnicity.

Athena's voice should not be one we view to be in the "wilderness" or attribute to her motives I know she does not have. We should not respond with our usual defensiveness rather ask ourselves : what positive influence can we exercise from the inside of our own ethnic group?Are we to be passive? The answer is no and applies to some of us who will not sweep under the carpet the stigmatization reflected via the abundance of negative stereotyping targeting her ethnic group.

Anytime I encounter someone who conveys " you know I do not have anything against Blacks, but they are...." I know I am dealing with someone in denial of their own prejudice. They present themselves as "having nothing against Blacks" yet they have the typical profile of a member of my White ethnic group who will give in to negative stereotyping targeting Blacks.

I will add that as a young White female who had the privilege to be hosted by a Black family, in the area known as Jamaica, Queens N.Y in my first trip to the US (I had just completed high school in my country, France), I was often questioned by a variety of White Americans as to why I did not spend my first venture in the US , hosted by a middle class White family. Such questioning escorted by raised eyebrows. It seemed to be a "bad thing to do" in their mind. A trip I had envisioned to be a simple touristic adventure became a social experiment. It was my first exposure in the US to the phenomenon of negative stereotyping and how it conditions some members of my own ethnic group in the US, representative of the ethnic majority, to associate Black ethnicity to something bad and negative. Mind you that a similar phenomenon exists in France too. I became the target of raised eyebrows and demeaning comments as I mostly socialized , in France, with students of Sub Sahara and Northern African and also Middle Eastern origin in my University. A White female hanging out with friends all of such ethnic origins "must have something wrong in her character". Let alone dating any of them. Hell would break loose.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

I don't need or want white people to beat themselves up.

But you all know that.

But we all need and should want people of good conscience to see what is really going on.

And let's face it, the majority of the majority has historically gotten race matters wrong.

That is simply a luxury we as a nation and a planet can no longer afford.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

I don't need or want white people to beat themselves up.

But you all know that.

But we all need and should want people of good conscience to see what is really going on.

And let's face it, the majority of the majority has historically gotten race matters wrong.

That is simply a luxury we as a nation and a planet can no longer afford.

And yet you are the one that insisted "Black people can't be racist", redefining the word to make it so.

 

[fromderinside]

I don't need or want white people to beat themselves up.

But you all know that.

But we all need and should want people of good conscience to see what is really going on.

And let's face it, the majority of the majority has historically gotten race matters wrong.

That is simply a luxury we as a nation and a planet can no longer afford.

And yet you are the one that insisted "Black people can't be racist", redefining the word to make it so.

I tend to see bigotry is a generalization from an observation of an individual's behavior to that of a group. So hating white cops in Ferguson becoming hating white society is racism. Those buildings burnt in Ferguson are physical demonstrations for my point.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

I don't need or want white people to beat themselves up.

But you all know that.

But we all need and should want people of good conscience to see what is really going on.

And let's face it, the majority of the majority has historically gotten race matters wrong.

That is simply a luxury we as a nation and a planet can no longer afford.

And yet you are the one that insisted "Black people can't be racist", redefining the word to make it so.

Show me how I redefined the word. Show me where, before me saying so on these boards, no one else every defined the word so.

You can't because that would be a lie.

THEREFORE I have redefined nothing, just chosen a definition that make you uncomfortable. And that is what is known as a personal problem. You should tend to that.

Give it up. That dog won't hunt (and that horse ain't gettin' up)

 

[Bomb#20]

Thank you so much Arctish for being sensitive to avoiding a derail.

She may still be French, but it looks like she's turning into one of us Yanks.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

And yet you are the one that insisted "Black people can't be racist", redefining the word to make it so.

I tend to see bigotry is a generalization from an observation of an individual's behavior to that of a group. So hating white cops in Ferguson becoming hating white society is racism. Those buildings burnt in Ferguson are physical demonstrations for my point.

Sure. And I bet hat has happened. It is an unfortunate phenomenon that spins in all directions. White cops are not bad for being white cops, even though there is an obvious problem with some white cops, and perhaps with some police service systems and cultures. A particular white cop could indeed be less racist than a particular black social worker. As I said in the other thread, when you generalize and judge based on race... that's racism. Using group averages to judge individuals is wrong.

 

[jab]

My point for pretty much the entire list.

Lots of white people do it, too. White people have a fancier name for it, though. They call it "self-defense".

Sorry, but evidence in the Trayvon case does not suggest that he was engaging in self defense.

He was standing his ground, if GZ was telling the truth. Is it only whites who legally can forcibly stand there ground in that there (red)neck of the woods?