The White Guy Problem

[Bomb#20]

It seems like one of the real challenges a white make leftist has to deal with is convincing himself he is a douchebag when he doesn't necessarily feel like one.

Well, channeling Mark Twain, to self-criticize is noble. To criticize the other members of a group one's in is nobler, and no trouble.

 

[Alcoholic Actuary]

I've never understood people who thought the best way to solve a problem was to assign blame.

aa

I agree completely.

But recognizing that skin color and gender play enormous roles in status and privileges awarded by society is not the same thing as blame.

I grew up with not a lot (not always indoor plumbing, for example) but with considerably more than my parents had when they were kids (definitely no indoor plumbing unless you count a pump at the kitchen sink as indoor plumbing). Because my parents worked hard and made certain that the assumption that all of their children would go on to college permeated our childhoods, we all did earn university degrees. All of us are much better off economically than my parents ever dreamed of being.

Wherever I go, no matter what situation or setting, including events where some pretty wealthy, high status and important people make up a large portion of attendees, I am always assumed to 'belong.' I've never been mistaken for the maid or help.

No one suggested I got my job, my admission to university or my (merit based) scholarships because of affirmative action.

No one looks at me and thinks I grew up poor, that I am uneducated, dangerous, out of place, or that I am on any kind of assistance, although for much of my growing up and very young adulthood, I would have qualified for assistance.

When I go shopping, I am not followed around by store clerks nor am I steered to the less expensive merchandise, even when I am dressed in jeans and sneakers (and not the fancy high priced ones). I see this happen to women of color who are dressed much nicer than I am. It's worse for men of color.

My kids were furious when they realized their non-white friends were being followed in stores while they were left alone to browse. Note: my son's black friends attended the same university, dressed better and had a higher GPA (high school and university) than my son, but his friend was followed every single time he went into a store in that college town.

I am not worried that if my son is pulled over for a broken tail light, the patrol officer will think he sees a weapon or weed or worse. I do not worry that my son will be killed for a minor traffic offense. Or a major one, for that matter.

The only difference between me and women who from similar backgrounds but who have black skin is the color of our skin.

Because I am female, I grew up hearing that girls were not good at math or science, although my sisters and I all excelled at both and went into STEM fields. It was assumed that I had no mechanical ability and didn't understand sports. When I was a young adult, I was told to my face that I didn't need as much money as a man did although I was single and self supporting. That attitude: the woman doesn't need to earn as much money, regardless of her marital status, still exists, although it is not stated so baldly. Also the assumption that after a woman has children, she is less 'dedicated' to her job while men are still seen as being more responsible and more dedicated if they marry and have children.

Now, I agree that the treatment that I get because I am white should not be viewed as 'privilege' but as the norm and should be afforded to all, not just those that unconsciously our society views as having higher status. I think that the benefits my husband gets for being male (as well as white) should be extended to all, as well.

Privilege is a relative. If persons of color, regardless of gender, were all treated as 'belonging' and as being accepted as intelligent, hard working, responsible members of society and that perceptions of laziness and violent tendencies, etc. were only meted out when actual behavior merited, then we would not be talking about white or white male privilege.

We're not there yet.

I recognize white privilege everywhere. What I don't know is what exactly I'm supposed to do about it. According to just about anyone who points it out, there is really no way to undo it. What do I do when I see a white person in a store not being followed?

aa

- - - Updated - - -

I've never understood people who thought the best way to solve a problem was to assign blame.

aa

People who say things like this are the real problem.

I assume this perfect illustration of my point was sarcasm.

aa

 

[AthenaAwakened]

I agree completely.

But recognizing that skin color and gender play enormous roles in status and privileges awarded by society is not the same thing as blame.

I grew up with not a lot (not always indoor plumbing, for example) but with considerably more than my parents had when they were kids (definitely no indoor plumbing unless you count a pump at the kitchen sink as indoor plumbing). Because my parents worked hard and made certain that the assumption that all of their children would go on to college permeated our childhoods, we all did earn university degrees. All of us are much better off economically than my parents ever dreamed of being.

Wherever I go, no matter what situation or setting, including events where some pretty wealthy, high status and important people make up a large portion of attendees, I am always assumed to 'belong.' I've never been mistaken for the maid or help.

No one suggested I got my job, my admission to university or my (merit based) scholarships because of affirmative action.

No one looks at me and thinks I grew up poor, that I am uneducated, dangerous, out of place, or that I am on any kind of assistance, although for much of my growing up and very young adulthood, I would have qualified for assistance.

When I go shopping, I am not followed around by store clerks nor am I steered to the less expensive merchandise, even when I am dressed in jeans and sneakers (and not the fancy high priced ones). I see this happen to women of color who are dressed much nicer than I am. It's worse for men of color.

My kids were furious when they realized their non-white friends were being followed in stores while they were left alone to browse. Note: my son's black friends attended the same university, dressed better and had a higher GPA (high school and university) than my son, but his friend was followed every single time he went into a store in that college town.

I am not worried that if my son is pulled over for a broken tail light, the patrol officer will think he sees a weapon or weed or worse. I do not worry that my son will be killed for a minor traffic offense. Or a major one, for that matter.

The only difference between me and women who from similar backgrounds but who have black skin is the color of our skin.

Because I am female, I grew up hearing that girls were not good at math or science, although my sisters and I all excelled at both and went into STEM fields. It was assumed that I had no mechanical ability and didn't understand sports. When I was a young adult, I was told to my face that I didn't need as much money as a man did although I was single and self supporting. That attitude: the woman doesn't need to earn as much money, regardless of her marital status, still exists, although it is not stated so baldly. Also the assumption that after a woman has children, she is less 'dedicated' to her job while men are still seen as being more responsible and more dedicated if they marry and have children.

Now, I agree that the treatment that I get because I am white should not be viewed as 'privilege' but as the norm and should be afforded to all, not just those that unconsciously our society views as having higher status. I think that the benefits my husband gets for being male (as well as white) should be extended to all, as well.

Privilege is a relative. If persons of color, regardless of gender, were all treated as 'belonging' and as being accepted as intelligent, hard working, responsible members of society and that perceptions of laziness and violent tendencies, etc. were only meted out when actual behavior merited, then we would not be talking about white or white male privilege.

We're not there yet.

I recognize white privilege everywhere. What I don't know is what exactly I'm supposed to do about it. According to just about anyone who points it out, there is really no way to undo it. What do I do when I see a white person in a store not being followed?

aa

- - - Updated - - -

What do you want to do about it?

 

[barbos]

So, not being beaten by a police is a privilege now, good to know I have it.

 

[Toni]

I agree completely.

But recognizing that skin color and gender play enormous roles in status and privileges awarded by society is not the same thing as blame.

I grew up with not a lot (not always indoor plumbing, for example) but with considerably more than my parents had when they were kids (definitely no indoor plumbing unless you count a pump at the kitchen sink as indoor plumbing). Because my parents worked hard and made certain that the assumption that all of their children would go on to college permeated our childhoods, we all did earn university degrees. All of us are much better off economically than my parents ever dreamed of being.

Wherever I go, no matter what situation or setting, including events where some pretty wealthy, high status and important people make up a large portion of attendees, I am always assumed to 'belong.' I've never been mistaken for the maid or help.

No one suggested I got my job, my admission to university or my (merit based) scholarships because of affirmative action.

No one looks at me and thinks I grew up poor, that I am uneducated, dangerous, out of place, or that I am on any kind of assistance, although for much of my growing up and very young adulthood, I would have qualified for assistance.

When I go shopping, I am not followed around by store clerks nor am I steered to the less expensive merchandise, even when I am dressed in jeans and sneakers (and not the fancy high priced ones). I see this happen to women of color who are dressed much nicer than I am. It's worse for men of color.

My kids were furious when they realized their non-white friends were being followed in stores while they were left alone to browse. Note: my son's black friends attended the same university, dressed better and had a higher GPA (high school and university) than my son, but his friend was followed every single time he went into a store in that college town.

I am not worried that if my son is pulled over for a broken tail light, the patrol officer will think he sees a weapon or weed or worse. I do not worry that my son will be killed for a minor traffic offense. Or a major one, for that matter.

The only difference between me and women who from similar backgrounds but who have black skin is the color of our skin.

Because I am female, I grew up hearing that girls were not good at math or science, although my sisters and I all excelled at both and went into STEM fields. It was assumed that I had no mechanical ability and didn't understand sports. When I was a young adult, I was told to my face that I didn't need as much money as a man did although I was single and self supporting. That attitude: the woman doesn't need to earn as much money, regardless of her marital status, still exists, although it is not stated so baldly. Also the assumption that after a woman has children, she is less 'dedicated' to her job while men are still seen as being more responsible and more dedicated if they marry and have children.

Now, I agree that the treatment that I get because I am white should not be viewed as 'privilege' but as the norm and should be afforded to all, not just those that unconsciously our society views as having higher status. I think that the benefits my husband gets for being male (as well as white) should be extended to all, as well.

Privilege is a relative. If persons of color, regardless of gender, were all treated as 'belonging' and as being accepted as intelligent, hard working, responsible members of society and that perceptions of laziness and violent tendencies, etc. were only meted out when actual behavior merited, then we would not be talking about white or white male privilege.

We're not there yet.

I recognize white privilege everywhere. What I don't know is what exactly I'm supposed to do about it. According to just about anyone who points it out, there is really no way to undo it. What do I do when I see a white person in a store not being followed?

aa

Fight for social justice for all.

There seems to be a change in attitude in society in general that when making things equal, it means lowering the status quo to what the disadvantaged person or group experiences. This would be akin to the civil rights activists of the 1960s advocating that no one be allowed to vote because black people's right to vote was being infringed upon. Instead, what was fought for was that rights enjoyed by whites be extended, as the constitution mandated, to all people, regardless of their race or color.

What I advocate is that we stop seeing non-white people as being more suspicious, more dangerous, less worthy of being treated with dignity and respect that is routinely afforded white people.

Sometimes, this means not giving our patronage to certain businesses, being mindful of which candidates we vote into office, pay attention to the consequences--intended and unintended, of policies and laws which exclude rather than include. And so on.

 

[Bronzeage]

So, not being beaten by a police is a privilege now, good to know I have it.

Don't undervalue that one.

 

[dystopian]

Fight for social justice for all.

There seems to be a change in attitude in society in general that when making things equal, it means lowering the status quo to what the disadvantaged person or group experiences. This would be akin to the civil rights activists of the 1960s advocating that no one be allowed to vote because black people's right to vote was being infringed upon. Instead, what was fought for was that rights enjoyed by whites be extended, as the constitution mandated, to all people, regardless of their race or color.

What I advocate is that we stop seeing non-white people as being more suspicious, more dangerous, less worthy of being treated with dignity and respect that is routinely afforded white people.

Sometimes, this means not giving our patronage to certain businesses, being mindful of which candidates we vote into office, pay attention to the consequences--intended and unintended, of policies and laws which exclude rather than include. And so on.

I agree with everything in your post, except calling it 'fighting'. That has a certain charge that I think can be off-putting; fighting implies a lot more effort than what you're saying actually takes. Treating non-white people the same way you treat white people really isn't hard at all; at this point it doesn't require us to 'fight' in order to get equality for all, at least in western societies... it just requires us to recognize that treating everyone according to the same standard ought to be 'normal'. Once that recognition is firmly in place, the rest follows naturally.

If you tell a man he has to put in real effort to improve the life of someone else with no immediate benefit to himself, he's likely to find an excuse to not do it even if he agrees with the idea of improving lives.

If you tell him that all he has to do is *not* do something in order to improve the life of someone else, then unless that something is of importance to him he doesn't have a real reason to come up with an excuse.

I'd kind of liken it to the way conservative religious groupings here used to try and impose their values on society. When I was a kid, we'd regularly hear them try to push the idea that the media was full of horrible corrupting influences and that the government needed to take steps to censor the 'filth'. There were two ways of trying to combat that, 1) try to fight fire with fire and demand that the religious conservatives adapt to the times and make the effort of changing their ways. Or 2) Make them irrelevant by pointing out that all they had to do was turn off the TV. We went with the 2nd option, and 20 years later these groups have indeed become largely irrelevant, they pop up every now and then but they're a shadow of their former selves and not taken seriously anymore. I think that if the first solution were attempted in greater force, then it'd have caused people to dig their heels in the sand and we'd still be arguing about it in the halls of government and beyond.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

We didn't get things like gay rights and gay marriage over here because of gay people and their supports telling the rest of society that everything's their fault and they need to change things so that the gay people can have rights too. We got those things because gay activists sounded eminently reasonable when they pointed out that they should be allowed to have the same rights as everyone else. They didn't tell straight people to change; just to not get in the way. That was reasonable, and thus they got sympathy and change was ultimately enacted. It's a tactic that worked, and which is being rejected by many SJW's.

That is an excellent point. Not once did I ever hear the phrase "straight privilege". Nor did I ever hear "you straight people do x". I actually don't think I ever heard any attack on straight people from gay people during the battle for gay rights. It was always an attack on bigots, not straight people in general. Why is it different with race?

 

[dystopian]

We didn't get things like gay rights and gay marriage over here because of gay people and their supports telling the rest of society that everything's their fault and they need to change things so that the gay people can have rights too. We got those things because gay activists sounded eminently reasonable when they pointed out that they should be allowed to have the same rights as everyone else. They didn't tell straight people to change; just to not get in the way. That was reasonable, and thus they got sympathy and change was ultimately enacted. It's a tactic that worked, and which is being rejected by many SJW's.

That is an excellent point. Not once did I ever hear the phrase "straight privilege". Nor did I ever hear "you straight people do x". I actually don't think I ever heard any attack on straight people from gay people during the battle for gay rights. It was always an attack on bigots, not straight people in general. Why is it different with race?

If I had to guess; numbers. Gay people at most represent about 10% of a given population, which might not represent critical mass even when you add in straight supporters of gay rights. Racial minorities on the other hand represent a much bigger slice of the pie. The closer an oppressed group is to the majority in terms of numbers the more confident its members become, which in turn can encourage them to take on a more confrontational tone. Plus, the larger the group, the greater the effect of psychological reinforcement within the group, thus risking further increase of the confrontational thinking. All those negative experiences of oppression get bounced around within the group, fueling and enhancing resentment. That's really why you want to treat groups properly before they grow to a certain size and you lose the ability to just talk things out.

 

[Bronzeage]

We didn't get things like gay rights and gay marriage over here because of gay people and their supports telling the rest of society that everything's their fault and they need to change things so that the gay people can have rights too. We got those things because gay activists sounded eminently reasonable when they pointed out that they should be allowed to have the same rights as everyone else. They didn't tell straight people to change; just to not get in the way. That was reasonable, and thus they got sympathy and change was ultimately enacted. It's a tactic that worked, and which is being rejected by many SJW's.

That is an excellent point. Not once did I ever hear the phrase "straight privilege". Nor did I ever hear "you straight people do x". I actually don't think I ever heard any attack on straight people from gay people during the battle for gay rights. It was always an attack on bigots, not straight people in general. Why is it different with race?

In the days when a homosexual was considered an easy target for blackmailers, a homosexual would not be considered for most government jobs in the Department of Defense, or State Department. It was straight people who made this rule, which naturally gave straight job applicants an advantage. Would this be straight privilege, or do we call it something else?

 

[Toni]

That is an excellent point. Not once did I ever hear the phrase "straight privilege". Nor did I ever hear "you straight people do x". I actually don't think I ever heard any attack on straight people from gay people during the battle for gay rights. It was always an attack on bigots, not straight people in general. Why is it different with race?

In the days when a homosexual was considered an easy target for blackmailers, a homosexual would not be considered for most government jobs in the Department of Defense, or State Department. It was straight people who made this rule, which naturally gave straight job applicants an advantage. Would this be straight privilege, or do we call it something else?

The fight for gay rights is taking place in a different era than when the Civil Rights movement began and is using different strategies for different times. The reason I believe that gay rights have been so successful in such a relatively short time is that the strategy is very much: hey, we're just like you. We're your sons/daughters/aunts/uncles/grandparents/parents/nice guy next door. Likely most people know people who are gay and like/accept them. Gay/straight is not immediately obvious but race almost always is. It is harder to identify a gay person as 'other' if you already know/like/work with/are related to that person. Bigotry is much harder to apply to individuals and much easier to throw at 'strangers.'

 

[RVonse]

So to find a woman who has more privilege than a white male, we have speak in terms of Chelsea Clinton? And once you name Chelsea Clinton, the millions of women who are not Chelsea Clinton can no longer claim that white men have a white male privilege?

Just go into any divorce court in the United States, and if you are a woman you have privilege beyond what any man will ever know. And even if you don't want to go to divorce court where half of everyone will end up anyway, you have only to look at female privilege with the police. Another poster named Derec has posted numerous threads on this board with real examples even if you want to bury your head in the sand.

 

[Bronzeage]

In the days when a homosexual was considered an easy target for blackmailers, a homosexual would not be considered for most government jobs in the Department of Defense, or State Department. It was straight people who made this rule, which naturally gave straight job applicants an advantage. Would this be straight privilege, or do we call it something else?

The fight for gay rights is taking place in a different era than when the Civil Rights movement began and is using different strategies for different times. The reason I believe that gay rights have been so successful in such a relatively short time is that the strategy is very much: hey, we're just like you. We're your sons/daughters/aunts/uncles/grandparents/parents/nice guy next door. Likely most people know people who are gay and like/accept them. Gay/straight is not immediately obvious but race almost always is. It is harder to identify a gay person as 'other' if you already know/like/work with/are related to that person. Bigotry is much harder to apply to individuals and much easier to throw at 'strangers.'

As someone said, "No one ever had to go home and tell their mother that they were black."

Another factor to consider, very little anti-gay bias and homophobia was in statutes. It was an unwritten and cultural bias, but there were never "separate but equal" legal mandates for homosexuals. When homosexuals were considered by the legal system, they were considered degenerates, not second class citizens.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

So to find a woman who has more privilege than a white male, we have speak in terms of Chelsea Clinton? And once you name Chelsea Clinton, the millions of women who are not Chelsea Clinton can no longer claim that white men have a white male privilege?

Just go into any divorce court in the United States, and if you are a woman you have privilege beyond what any man will ever know. And even if you don't want to go to divorce court where half of everyone will end up anyway, you have only to look at female privilege with the police. Another poster named Derec has posted numerous threads on this board with real examples even if you want to bury your head in the sand.

That's it?

Divorce?

Who writes divorce law? Which gender instituted the practices and procedures of divorce action and law? Why did this gender do so?

What are the results of divorce by gender?

How do these results break down by class?

Yes Derec has posted and will post in the future and has been shot down and will be shot down in the future.

Now outside of Derec and divorce, in the totality of life, how are women more privileged than men?

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Another factor to consider, very little anti-gay bias and homophobia was in statutes. It was an unwritten and cultural bias, but there were never "separate but equal" legal mandates for homosexuals. When homosexuals were considered by the legal system, they were considered degenerates, not second class citizens.

Did your country forbid black people from marrying other black people? It may have when you had slavery maybe?

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Who writes divorce law? Which gender instituted the practices and procedures of divorce action and law? Why did this gender do so?

That is irrelevant to the privilege existing. Are you capable of admitting the privilege exists, or will you deny such a thing could be fathomable?

 

[Derec]

As someone said, "No one ever had to go home and tell their mother that they were black."

Which is not as good a thing as you are implying. Many gay kids who came out to their parents were disowned by their families, kicked out of their houses and generally lost their family support system.

Another factor to consider, very little anti-gay bias and homophobia was in statutes. It was an unwritten and cultural bias, but there were never "separate but equal" legal mandates for homosexuals. When homosexuals were considered by the legal system, they were considered degenerates, not second class citizens.

Actually until 2003 gay sex was a major felony in many states.

 

[Derec]

That's it?Divorce?

It's an example.

Who writes divorce law?

What does that have to do with anything?

Which gender instituted the practices and procedures of divorce action and law? Why did this gender do so?

Are we going to talk about ancient history of the way the laws and practices are today?

What are the results of divorce by gender?

2/3 of all divorces are initiated by females. 94% of all divorces where alimony is awarded it is awarded to the woman.

How do these results break down by class?

Does it matter to the fact that there is female privilege in divorce?

Yes Derec has posted and will post in the future and has been shot down and will be shot down in the future.

Because, as the Germans say "es kann nicht sein was nicht sein darf" ("things that are not allowed to happen can't hapen"). I.e., it is a matter of ideological faith that there can only be white male privilege and nothing else can be acknowledged to exist.

Now outside of Derec and divorce, in the totality of life, how are women more privileged than men?

Women are beneficiaries of affirmative action. Women are beneficiaries of benefit when it comes to sentencing in criminal cases. Health insurance is not allowed by law to cost more for women, yet car and life insurance can charge men more. There are girl nights at bars and clubs. There are even female discounts at things like auto shops. Just some of examples of female privilege.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Who writes divorce law? Which gender instituted the practices and procedures of divorce action and law? Why did this gender do so?

That is irrelevant to the privilege existing. Are you capable of admitting the privilege exists, or will you deny such a thing could be fathomable?

No, it isn't. Divorce law and custom, as written and practiced, is both classist and paternalistic. Not to mention, much like marriage itself, it is also antiquated.

Alimony is not an invention of women, but fathers not willing to take care of their daughters or lose the value of a dowry after a divorce, not to mention a discouragement to ending the marriage at all.

And in the modern day, with no-fault divorce, it is not the power play it used to be.

As for the privilege of divorce, I doubt if you will find many poor and working class women who will agree with you, and they make up the majority of the population.

Interesting privilege, divorce

You only get to use it if your marriage fails, your home is broken, and your children are split between households.

Now that is a privilege women must be standing in line to take advantage of.

Whoopee

 

[Toni]

Which is not as good a thing as you are implying. Many gay kids who came out to their parents were disowned by their families, kicked out of their houses and generally lost their family support system.

I don't think anyone was implying that coming out to your parents, other family, friends and coworkers has ever been easy or without some really serious repercussions.

Another factor to consider, very little anti-gay bias and homophobia was in statutes. It was an unwritten and cultural bias, but there were never "separate but equal" legal mandates for homosexuals. When homosexuals were considered by the legal system, they were considered degenerates, not second class citizens.

Actually until 2003 gay sex was a major felony in many states.

How often was anyone prosecuted for such a felony? When was the last felony conviction?