It's an interesting way to explain it, putting it a way that is easy to understand. Instead of knee jerk reactions to the phrase (and avoids pigeon holing it into one singular arena), it shows how it effects everyone, just to varying degrees. (it is from mtv, and is on facebook, but outside of "MTV...lol" responses, I hope that people will actually give the video a listen. You don't need an account to view it) On a semi related note, it's kind of a breath of fresh air to watch it and notice that there's no blame going on.
My reaction; The word "Privilege" has been around a lot longer than the 60's. Talking about White Privilege is much more recent. Anger is not a defense mechanism, it is a human feeling. If everyone has Privilege, then why the need to talk about it? It is promoted as the evil of the day, even the reason for Obama's difficulties. “Many of the problems my administration has faced addressing our economic recovery have stemmed from an age old problem which today we are finally acting on which is white privilege & Christianity, both have slowed American progress now and in the past.” That does not sound like my President. Yes, it pisses me off! Anger even. Can't remember hearing about this "Privilege" before the divisive one.
The nice thing about being a Democrat is that Republicans say so many stupid things, we don't have to make up quotes like you just did.
I'm white and can see racial privelege exists clearly and explicitly. It took me about two seconds to figure out. In fact, the term "check your privelege at the door" makes TOTAL SENSE to me. But there is also social privelege and privelege based on sex roles. The only problem I see is when social justice warriors go off the deep end. They attribute social inequalities that don't exist or are made up and I'm like, "are you out of your f-cking mind!" If takes away from any understanding of actual problems. Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk
Well. The Duluth Model for example. The ideas preventing societies from having gender - neutral treatment and conflict resolution for both sexes in domestic abuse cases. It takes two people to start a fight. And since communication methods are taught to children. It seems assinine to me that we teach diversion counciling that men are the main transgressors in these cases when women exhibit violent behavior in the majority as well. Why are we just sending one party to jail and not treating both? Where therapists said they looked for accepted patterns of powerful male dominance in men with domestic abuse problems, all they found were feelings of helplessness and weakness. But society has this sunken cost evaluation it seems with the idea that men have the majority of power in relationships and our funding model is based on that. Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk
Actually, I think you are correct. For some reason is was reported though. But hell the man is far too cool to do the deed himself, he will daisy dance around the issue and let other spread the word. Example; "On white privilege, he stated: "most working- and middle-class white Americans don't feel that they have been particularly privileged by their race." That doesn't mean he believes that they haven't been privileged, but that's beside the point for the purpose of winning their support for his policies. The President also said "to wish away the resentments of white Americans, to label them as misguided or even racist, without recognizing they are grounded in legitimate concerns--this too widens the racial divide and blocks the path to understanding." By this point he has, hopefully, established some credibility with the resentful whites he is trying to reach. He has established that he has empathy for their position." https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjC3JXq7q_KAhVH72MKHYi2AoEQFggpMAE&url=http://nationalreport.net/president-obama-white-privilege-christianity-slowed-american-progress/&usg=AFQjCNHxtONhT-vi-IUbGTbPIVgqPaFgLA&sig2=JLMfXpBglYn-_3uRqbECNw https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjC3JXq7q_KAhVH72MKHYi2AoEQFgghMAA&url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ian-reifowitz/barack-obama-white-privilege_b_1922588.html&usg=AFQjCNHZVhy_cZNHNxwcNiJ5ObAKE6PfKA&sig2=01-sB_NpBDWL50wTxwDNpg This is good, he won't say it, he won't repeat it, he won't refute it, even though it is all over the place since he took office. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=8&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjC3JXq7q_KAhVH72MKHYi2AoEQFghQMAc&url=http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Stossel/story?id=5833322&usg=AFQjCNGQK_MYUOJK2gug4xQivSaLZTxQmQ&sig2=Covu4gSEKmvwNE9h-36iNA Even the article dviss posted about Obama saying some shit, just one more beat to get the subject rockin. One thing is for sure though, there is hardly a word about white privilege to be found prior to the Obama era, but he himself never says it or a word about it. Unless the first article that reportedly quotes him is true. I doubt it, but the word does get out somehow about what the chief thinks. Just like the IRS knows whom to investigate and withhold status needed for fund raising.
Ha! Well feel free to remain a Democrat, you fit the mold, but you have become sort of a lovable cookie cut to fit.
Oh shit, one more thing. I don't like it when straight people get touchy feely and start kissing in public. POV public straight porn videos are of course the exception.
That damn Obama... He invented White Privilege... Jesus man... You know we can read what you post right?
From a purely theoretical point of view, I have no problem with the discussion of privilege, I think it most certainly does exist in many forms. However, from a real-life point of view, privilege is uses much more often as a derogatory comment, and much of the time it ends up actually doing damage to what otherwise could be a thoughtful discussion. I think overall, it's a damaging term that ends up doing the opposite of what was suggested in the video. It becomes such a loaded word that it actually kills communication. If we are to have a discussion on race and white privilege is thrown out, it puts the white person in a position where if they continue the conversation without totally giving in, they are put in the "racist" role. Same thing discussing gender. Honestly, it's a term that's often used by people who don't have the life experience or wherewithal to discuss the same topics honestly and without the crutch of such powerful words. If the topic needs to discussed, it's easy to point out the inequities that lead to bias for one group, or the unintended benefits one group observes, without having to rely on a hot-button word like Privilege. For anyone who actually wants to further a discussion on this topic, try discussing the topic without having it turn to an accusatory, pre-written rant.
I like Nike, but wait a minute. The neighborhoods are poor so put some money in it. That is basically my favorite Public Enemy line, I think we're all fucked going forward so have at the racism stuff while you still can. Watch Elysium for a glimpse of what is coming.
There are special government loans available only to minorities, black people get bonus on their SAT scores, minorities are given preference for certain government jobs, they get bonus points simply for the color of their skin. There are scholarships available only to minorities. So it's actually MINORITIES that get the special privledges, not white people. White people have imaginary privledge, that exists only in the minds of minorities and libtards, while minorities have actual tangible privledges that you can point to. And what's the solution to the imaginary privledge that whites supposedly enjoy? Give more REAL privledges to minorities. What a bunch of fucked up nonsense. Side note: Asians are an exception to the SAT issue, since they actually have points deducted from their SATs to account for the fact that they out perform every other race.
All right dviss, you give us the essence of the moment of inertia with privilege. Please, the calculus of when the mass of the subject was formed.
