This topic has been locked by a moderator.
I’m not saying he shouldn’t care about children starving because he’s not starving. I’m saying he shouldn’t bitch about black people being offended by something that they are offended by. There’s a difference.
I don’t think there is.
Well then there’s nothing further to discuss. If you consider that dismissive then so be it.
evidence of bad attitude.
Whatever sigh eyeroll clapping gif etcetera.
¯\(ツ)/¯
No I’m asking what evidence in the ESPN thing? A lot of people (not just blacks but let’s say a lot of black people) thought it was offensive and shouldn’t have been done. Warb’s opinion is that those people are wrong, my opinion is that he shouldn’t give that particular opinion. I’m not saying he can’t, I’m saying he shouldn’t. What’s the available evidence in the specific case that caused pages of pointless arguing?
You’re being dismissive. You’re saying because a circumstance doesn’t affect him he shouldn’t give a shit about it, nor should his opinion matter because his knowledge is not informed by first hand experience.
I’m not saying he shouldn’t care about children starving because he’s not starving. I’m saying he shouldn’t bitch about black people being offended by something that they are offended by. There’s a difference.
by you are still being dismissive and saying my opinion doesn’t matter. You are automatically invalidating my opinion.
I love how you get to determine when it is reasonable for people of color to be offended(fantasy auction), and when it isn’t(guy named Robert Lee).
I don’t. Black people do. I just follow their lead.
So if you found a black person that was offend by the reporter being named Robert Lee, you would then agree with what ESPN did with the guy?
come on! You decided it was reasonable to be offended at the fantasy auction but not at the Robert Lee thing. You’ve basically said that any black person that says they’re offended by the reporter being named Robert Lee is an idiot who happens to be black.
Jeebus asked a better version of this question and I already answered it. Also I already said there are crazy people in every group. But feel free to keep ignoring the things I’ve said.
I’m not sure of how good of a poll Public Policy Polling is, but this is a stunning result.
Asked what racial group they think faces the most discrimination in America, 45% of Trump voters say it’s white people followed by 17% for Native Americans with 16% picking African Americans, and 5% picking Latinos. Asked what religious group they think faces the most discrimination in America, 54% of Trump voters says it’s Christians followed by 22% for Muslims and 12% for Jews. There is a mindset among many Trump voters that it’s whites and Christians getting trampled on in America that makes it unlikely they would abandon Trump over his “both sides” rhetoric.
Overall 89% of Americans have a negative opinion of neo-Nazis to 3% with a positive one, and 87% have an unfavorable opinion of white supremacists to 4% with a positive one. Just 11% agree with the sentiment that it’s possible for white supremacists and neo-Nazis to be ‘very fine people,’ to 69% who say that’s not possible.
How do eight percent of people have no opinion on white supremacists?
Maybe they are white supremacists themselves, yet too afraid to say so?
I’m not saying he shouldn’t care about children starving because he’s not starving. I’m saying he shouldn’t bitch about black people being offended by something that they are offended by. There’s a difference.
I don’t think there is.
Well then there’s nothing further to discuss. If you consider that dismissive then so be it.
evidence of bad attitude.
Whatever sigh eyeroll clapping gif etcetera.
¯\(ツ)/¯
I’m saying that he can have an opinion if he wants to. Being white doesn’t make him incompetent or irrelevant when talking about non-white issues. He might not understand the full scope of the experience, but that doesn’t invalidate his opinion.
I agree with all of this, by the way. He can always have an opinion, and he can talk about non-white issues. I’m white too. I’m saying that if a bunch of black people think something is offensive, it might just be offensive despite the white dude who doesn’t think it’s offensive. If there’s any doubt, I’m going to go with the people who have the full scope of the experience.
And as I said, if it’s something ludicrous like Jack Black having to change his name to Jack White, that’s a different story because you aren’t going to find a bunch of black people complaining about that.
Let’s say hypothetically that you could, though. There is a very large contingent of black people that are mad about Jack Black’s name. Would you still say that it’s silly?
Hypothetically, I’d still say I think it’s silly, but I’d also allow for the possibility that I don’t fully understand the situation due to my experiences being different than a black person’s experiences. Yeah, it’s probably still silly, but why do so many black people believe otherwise?
So would you then demand that Jack Black change his name?
No I’m asking what evidence in the ESPN thing? A lot of people (not just blacks but let’s say a lot of black people) thought it was offensive and shouldn’t have been done. Warb’s opinion is that those people are wrong, my opinion is that he shouldn’t give that particular opinion. I’m not saying he can’t, I’m saying he shouldn’t. What’s the available evidence that says I’m wrong or that Warb is right?
Your opinion is not contrary to Warbler’s opinion. Your opinion is opposed to Warbler’s opinion itself. You’re opposed to the idea that he has an opinion. Warbler’s opinion being wrong doesn’t make yours right.
Even if his opinion is incorrect, white privilege or not, he should be allowed to have it. And this is an open forum, so as long as he is civil he should be allowed to communicate it.
Can we just assume you’re going to agree with everything he says so you can spare us 30 more posts with the same gif?
ok.
I’m saying that he can have an opinion if he wants to. Being white doesn’t make him incompetent or irrelevant when talking about non-white issues. He might not understand the full scope of the experience, but that doesn’t invalidate his opinion.
I agree with all of this, by the way. He can always have an opinion, and he can talk about non-white issues. I’m white too. I’m saying that if a bunch of black people think something is offensive, it might just be offensive despite the white dude who doesn’t think it’s offensive. If there’s any doubt, I’m going to go with the people who have the full scope of the experience.
And as I said, if it’s something ludicrous like Jack Black having to change his name to Jack White, that’s a different story because you aren’t going to find a bunch of black people complaining about that.
Let’s say hypothetically that you could, though. There is a very large contingent of black people that are mad about Jack Black’s name. Would you still say that it’s silly?
Hypothetically, I’d still say I think it’s silly, but I’d also allow for the possibility that I don’t fully understand the situation due to my experiences being different than a black person’s experiences. Yeah, it’s probably still silly, but why do so many black people believe otherwise?
So would you then demand that Jack Black change his name?
I haven’t yet heard why so many black people are offended by his current name.
No I’m asking what evidence in the ESPN thing? A lot of people (not just blacks but let’s say a lot of black people) thought it was offensive and shouldn’t have been done. Warb’s opinion is that those people are wrong, my opinion is that he shouldn’t give that particular opinion. I’m not saying he can’t, I’m saying he shouldn’t. What’s the available evidence that says I’m wrong or that Warb is right?
Your opinion is not contrary to Warbler’s opinion. Your opinion is opposed to Warbler’s opinion itself. You’re opposed to the idea that he has an opinion. Warbler’s opinion being wrong doesn’t make yours right.
Even if his opinion is incorrect, white privilege or not, he should be allowed to have it. And this is an open forum, so as long as he is civil he should be allowed to communicate it.
Can we just assume you’re going to agree with everything he says so you can spare us 30 more posts with the same gif?
ok.
You already answered this question once with the clapping gif so it’s not clear what this response means.
I’m not sure why people have the idea that Frink and only Frink has the ability to declare what people should and shouldn’t be offended by.
It is because of his reaction to my opinion about the fantasy auction as compared to his opinion about the Robert Lee thing.
He thinks it is ok for white people to be critical about being offended over someone being named Robert Lee, yet not ok for white people to be critical about being offended by the fantasy auction. And who gets to decide where the line between the two are? He does. No one else is allowed to draw that line for themselves(if they are white).
I’m not saying he shouldn’t care about children starving because he’s not starving. I’m saying he shouldn’t bitch about black people being offended by something that they are offended by. There’s a difference.
I don’t think there is.
Well then there’s nothing further to discuss. If you consider that dismissive then so be it.
evidence of bad attitude.
Whatever sigh eyeroll clapping gif etcetera.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
FTFY
No I’m asking what evidence in the ESPN thing? A lot of people (not just blacks but let’s say a lot of black people) thought it was offensive and shouldn’t have been done. Warb’s opinion is that those people are wrong, my opinion is that he shouldn’t give that particular opinion. I’m not saying he can’t, I’m saying he shouldn’t. What’s the available evidence that says I’m wrong or that Warb is right?
Your opinion is not contrary to Warbler’s opinion. Your opinion is opposed to Warbler’s opinion itself. You’re opposed to the idea that he has an opinion. Warbler’s opinion being wrong doesn’t make yours right.
Even if his opinion is incorrect, white privilege or not, he should be allowed to have it. And this is an open forum, so as long as he is civil he should be allowed to communicate it.
Can we just assume you’re going to agree with everything he says so you can spare us 30 more posts with the same gif?
ok.
You already answered this question once with the clapping gif so it’s not clear what this response means.
no I didn’t, that was yhwx.
No I’m asking what evidence in the ESPN thing? A lot of people (not just blacks but let’s say a lot of black people) thought it was offensive and shouldn’t have been done. Warb’s opinion is that those people are wrong, my opinion is that he shouldn’t give that particular opinion. I’m not saying he can’t, I’m saying he shouldn’t. What’s the available evidence that says I’m wrong or that Warb is right?
Your opinion is not contrary to Warbler’s opinion. Your opinion is opposed to Warbler’s opinion itself. You’re opposed to the idea that he has an opinion. Warbler’s opinion being wrong doesn’t make yours right.
Even if his opinion is incorrect, white privilege or not, he should be allowed to have it. And this is an open forum, so as long as he is civil he should be allowed to communicate it.
Can we just assume you’re going to agree with everything he says so you can spare us 30 more posts with the same gif?
No I’m asking what evidence in the ESPN thing? A lot of people (not just blacks but let’s say a lot of black people) thought it was offensive and shouldn’t have been done. Warb’s opinion is that those people are wrong, my opinion is that he shouldn’t give that particular opinion. I’m not saying he can’t, I’m saying he shouldn’t. What’s the available evidence that says I’m wrong or that Warb is right?
Your opinion is not contrary to Warbler’s opinion. Your opinion is opposed to Warbler’s opinion itself. You’re opposed to the idea that he has an opinion. Warbler’s opinion being wrong doesn’t make yours right.
Even if his opinion is incorrect, white privilege or not, he should be allowed to have it. And this is an open forum, so as long as he is civil he should be allowed to communicate it.
Can we just assume you’re going to agree with everything he says so you can spare us 30 more posts with the same gif?
ok.
You already answered this question once with the clapping gif so it’s not clear what this response means.
no I didn’t, that was yhwx.
No I’m asking what evidence in the ESPN thing? A lot of people (not just blacks but let’s say a lot of black people) thought it was offensive and shouldn’t have been done. Warb’s opinion is that those people are wrong, my opinion is that he shouldn’t give that particular opinion. I’m not saying he can’t, I’m saying he shouldn’t. What’s the available evidence that says I’m wrong or that Warb is right?
Your opinion is not contrary to Warbler’s opinion. Your opinion is opposed to Warbler’s opinion itself. You’re opposed to the idea that he has an opinion. Warbler’s opinion being wrong doesn’t make yours right.
Even if his opinion is incorrect, white privilege or not, he should be allowed to have it. And this is an open forum, so as long as he is civil he should be allowed to communicate it.
Can we just assume you’re going to agree with everything he says so you can spare us 30 more posts with the same gif?
My bad.
I’m saying that he can have an opinion if he wants to. Being white doesn’t make him incompetent or irrelevant when talking about non-white issues. He might not understand the full scope of the experience, but that doesn’t invalidate his opinion.
I agree with all of this, by the way. He can always have an opinion, and he can talk about non-white issues. I’m white too. I’m saying that if a bunch of black people think something is offensive, it might just be offensive despite the white dude who doesn’t think it’s offensive. If there’s any doubt, I’m going to go with the people who have the full scope of the experience.
And as I said, if it’s something ludicrous like Jack Black having to change his name to Jack White, that’s a different story because you aren’t going to find a bunch of black people complaining about that.
Let’s say hypothetically that you could, though. There is a very large contingent of black people that are mad about Jack Black’s name. Would you still say that it’s silly?
Hypothetically, I’d still say I think it’s silly, but I’d also allow for the possibility that I don’t fully understand the situation due to my experiences being different than a black person’s experiences. Yeah, it’s probably still silly, but why do so many black people believe otherwise?
So would you then demand that Jack Black change his name?
I haven’t yet heard why so many black people are offended by his current name.
You didn’t answer the question. We were talking about a hypothetical where very large contingent of black people were mad about the guy’s name.
I’m not saying he shouldn’t care about children starving because he’s not starving. I’m saying he shouldn’t bitch about black people being offended by something that they are offended by. There’s a difference.
I don’t think there is.
Well then there’s nothing further to discuss. If you consider that dismissive then so be it.
evidence of bad attitude.
Whatever sigh eyeroll clapping gif etcetera.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
FTFY
As a human, I do not believe you have the right to tell an emoji it has to have shoulders.
I’m not saying he shouldn’t care about children starving because he’s not starving. I’m saying he shouldn’t bitch about black people being offended by something that they are offended by. There’s a difference.
I don’t think there is.
Well then there’s nothing further to discuss. If you consider that dismissive then so be it.
evidence of bad attitude.
Whatever sigh eyeroll clapping gif etcetera.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
FTFY
what did you fix?
I’m saying that he can have an opinion if he wants to. Being white doesn’t make him incompetent or irrelevant when talking about non-white issues. He might not understand the full scope of the experience, but that doesn’t invalidate his opinion.
I agree with all of this, by the way. He can always have an opinion, and he can talk about non-white issues. I’m white too. I’m saying that if a bunch of black people think something is offensive, it might just be offensive despite the white dude who doesn’t think it’s offensive. If there’s any doubt, I’m going to go with the people who have the full scope of the experience.
And as I said, if it’s something ludicrous like Jack Black having to change his name to Jack White, that’s a different story because you aren’t going to find a bunch of black people complaining about that.
Let’s say hypothetically that you could, though. There is a very large contingent of black people that are mad about Jack Black’s name. Would you still say that it’s silly?
Hypothetically, I’d still say I think it’s silly, but I’d also allow for the possibility that I don’t fully understand the situation due to my experiences being different than a black person’s experiences. Yeah, it’s probably still silly, but why do so many black people believe otherwise?
So would you then demand that Jack Black change his name?
I haven’t yet heard why so many black people are offended by his current name.
You didn’t answer the question. We were talking about a hypothetical where very large contingent of black people were mad about the guy’s name.
Read my responses again. I can’t answer the question because I don’t have the relevant information.
Also what do you mean by “demand Jack Black change his name”? How exactly would I be doing that?
I’m not saying he shouldn’t care about children starving because he’s not starving. I’m saying he shouldn’t bitch about black people being offended by something that they are offended by. There’s a difference.
I don’t think there is.
Well then there’s nothing further to discuss. If you consider that dismissive then so be it.
evidence of bad attitude.
Whatever sigh eyeroll clapping gif etcetera.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
FTFY
what did you fix?
He added the shoulders.
If someone is eating an apple and another person is just watching them eat the apple, which one has the more qualified opinion on the quality of that apple?
what exact quality of the apple are you talking about. Without tasting I can still testify to quality of how it looks and smells. Of course I can’t testify as to how it tastes unless I tasted it.
I think this exclusionary attitude again causes resentment both ways. Maybe Warbler doesn’t know about that specific apple, but then, perhaps he could offer a more objective perspective on other qualities of the apple, while the person eating the apple may be overly-concerned with the most salient qualities, such as flavor.
What if the person eating the apple gets food poisoning, and the other person doesn’t believe them, or says they need to get over it?
I’m saying that he can have an opinion if he wants to. Being white doesn’t make him incompetent or irrelevant when talking about non-white issues. He might not understand the full scope of the experience, but that doesn’t invalidate his opinion.
I agree with all of this, by the way. He can always have an opinion, and he can talk about non-white issues. I’m white too. I’m saying that if a bunch of black people think something is offensive, it might just be offensive despite the white dude who doesn’t think it’s offensive. If there’s any doubt, I’m going to go with the people who have the full scope of the experience.
And as I said, if it’s something ludicrous like Jack Black having to change his name to Jack White, that’s a different story because you aren’t going to find a bunch of black people complaining about that.
If someone is eating an apple and another person is just watching them eat the apple, which one has the more qualified opinion on the quality of that apple?
what exact quality of the apple are you talking about. Without tasting I can still testify to quality of how it looks and smells. Of course I can’t testify as to how it tastes unless I tasted it.
I think this exclusionary attitude again causes resentment both ways. Maybe Warbler doesn’t know about that specific apple, but then, perhaps he could offer a more objective perspective on other qualities of the apple, while the person eating the apple may be overly-concerned with the most salient qualities, such as flavor.
I feel there is plenty of room for multiple races, including the privileged majority, at the table of discussion. I feel like your above post was the first to truly acknowledge that.
Take Affirmative Action as an example. Minorities are not proportionally represented in certain work environments (particularly white color jobs) or in higher levels of education. So institutions might lower their standards for particular races in an effort to create a nominal representation.
But then think of the white guy with the 3.9 GPA who is not admitted to the elite school of his choice, but learns that the black gal with the 3.4 was. He might feel some resentment. Simply saying, “Oh, you’re a privileged white guy and you’ll find another school,” does not necessarily solve his feelings of disappointment or frustration. It might exacerbate feelings of resentment towards African-Americans he already held. Similarly, the 3.4 black student may not be as prepared for school and might be unable to make it through the program, owing to the challenges of attempting to make it through a school of intense standards. Perhaps this student might have had better success at a less prestigious school.
Bear in mind, this is in no way stating one race is inherently more intelligent than another. I feel this is obvious, but I worry that my words might be misinterpreted.
Back to my example, hey, we want minorities to be able to reach their dreams. Many do, in fact, come from an underprivileged environment, possibly in some urban school where the educational standards were not as high. This presents a challenge when trying to overcome the disadvantaged position of society. Lowering standards is a sort of an opportunity to get a foot up from that disadvantage. On the other hand, it could also be an opportunity for greater failure. And though the elementary education of the two students in question was not equal, will creating different standards for the same students now at the university-level somehow create equality? Probably not.
I’m not actually trying to say which is better: Affirmative Action or flat rate standards. I am trying to point out that it is a complex issue. Usually, these issues actually require people of different perspectives to find a healthy, lasting solution. Excluding whites, even whites who do not fully understand the nature of white privilege, from the discussion leads to more problems than it solves.
I’d post a clapping pic here, but I already agreed not to do that.
It’s certainly not because I’ve been saying so, although I keep hearing that I have been for some reason.
But you have been saying so. You said that white people, especially Warbler, due to white privilege, should not have an opinion on certain non-white matters. You then said that you do believe white people can, but that contradiction basically leads one to infer that you are the judge of what they should and should not have an opinion about.
chyron just put a big Ric pic in your sig and be done with it.
It’s certainly not because I’ve been saying so, although I keep hearing that I have been for some reason.
But you have been saying so. You said that white people, especially Warbler, due to white privilege, should not have an opinion on certain non-white matters. You then said that you do believe white people can, but that basically leads one to infer that you are the judge of what they should and should not have an opinion about.
I’ve said several things that directly indicated otherwise, but it seems like it would be a waste of time to keep repeating them over and over.
I’m saying that he can have an opinion if he wants to. Being white doesn’t make him incompetent or irrelevant when talking about non-white issues. He might not understand the full scope of the experience, but that doesn’t invalidate his opinion.
I agree with all of this, by the way. He can always have an opinion, and he can talk about non-white issues. I’m white too. I’m saying that if a bunch of black people think something is offensive, it might just be offensive despite the white dude who doesn’t think it’s offensive. If there’s any doubt, I’m going to go with the people who have the full scope of the experience.
And as I said, if it’s something ludicrous like Jack Black having to change his name to Jack White, that’s a different story because you aren’t going to find a bunch of black people complaining about that.
If someone is eating an apple and another person is just watching them eat the apple, which one has the more qualified opinion on the quality of that apple?
what exact quality of the apple are you talking about. Without tasting I can still testify to quality of how it looks and smells. Of course I can’t testify as to how it tastes unless I tasted it.
I think this exclusionary attitude again causes resentment both ways. Maybe Warbler doesn’t know about that specific apple, but then, perhaps he could offer a more objective perspective on other qualities of the apple, while the person eating the apple may be overly-concerned with the most salient qualities, such as flavor.
I feel there is plenty of room for multiple races, including the privileged majority, at the table of discussion. I feel like your above post was the first to truly acknowledge that.
Take Affirmative Action as an example. Minorities are not proportionally represented in certain work environments (particularly white color jobs) or in higher levels of education. So institutions might lower their standards for particular races in an effort to create a nominal representation.
But then think of the white guy with the 3.9 GPA who is not admitted to the elite school of his choice, but learns that the black gal with the 3.4 was. He might feel some resentment. Simply saying, “Oh, you’re a privileged white guy and you’ll find another school,” does not necessarily solve his feelings of disappointment or frustration. It might exacerbate feelings of resentment towards African-Americans he already held. Similarly, the 3.4 black student may not be as prepared for school and might be unable to make it through the program, owing to the challenges of attempting to make it through a school of intense standards. Perhaps this student might have had better success at a less prestigious school.
Bear in mind, this is in no way stating one race is inherently more intelligent than another. I feel this is obvious, but I worry that my words might be misinterpreted.
Back to my example, hey, we want minorities to be able to reach their dreams. Many do, in fact, come from an underprivileged environment, possibly in some urban school where the educational standards were not as high. This presents a challenge when trying to overcome the disadvantaged position of society. Lowering standards is a sort of an opportunity to get a foot up from that disadvantage. On the other hand, it could also be an opportunity for greater failure. And though the elementary education of the two students in question was not equal, will creating different standards for the same students now at the university-level somehow create equality? Probably not.
I’m not actually trying to say which is better: Affirmative Action or flat rate standards. I am trying to point out that it is a complex issue. Usually, these issues actually require people of different perspectives to find a healthy, lasting solution. Excluding whites, even whites who do not fully understand the nature of white privilege, from the discussion leads to more problems than it solves.
Affirmative Action is a much more complex (and important) issue than an ESPN commercial that might be offensive. I’m not so quick to write off anyone’s opinion on it. I’m conflicted myself.
So again you’re deciding when an issue complex enough for it to be ok for a white person to have and opinion about it and state it.
I’m saying that he can have an opinion if he wants to. Being white doesn’t make him incompetent or irrelevant when talking about non-white issues. He might not understand the full scope of the experience, but that doesn’t invalidate his opinion.
I agree with all of this, by the way. He can always have an opinion, and he can talk about non-white issues. I’m white too. I’m saying that if a bunch of black people think something is offensive, it might just be offensive despite the white dude who doesn’t think it’s offensive. If there’s any doubt, I’m going to go with the people who have the full scope of the experience.
And as I said, if it’s something ludicrous like Jack Black having to change his name to Jack White, that’s a different story because you aren’t going to find a bunch of black people complaining about that.
If someone is eating an apple and another person is just watching them eat the apple, which one has the more qualified opinion on the quality of that apple?
what exact quality of the apple are you talking about. Without tasting I can still testify to quality of how it looks and smells. Of course I can’t testify as to how it tastes unless I tasted it.
I think this exclusionary attitude again causes resentment both ways. Maybe Warbler doesn’t know about that specific apple, but then, perhaps he could offer a more objective perspective on other qualities of the apple, while the person eating the apple may be overly-concerned with the most salient qualities, such as flavor.
I feel there is plenty of room for multiple races, including the privileged majority, at the table of discussion. I feel like your above post was the first to truly acknowledge that.
Take Affirmative Action as an example. Minorities are not proportionally represented in certain work environments (particularly white color jobs) or in higher levels of education. So institutions might lower their standards for particular races in an effort to create a nominal representation.
But then think of the white guy with the 3.9 GPA who is not admitted to the elite school of his choice, but learns that the black gal with the 3.4 was. He might feel some resentment. Simply saying, “Oh, you’re a privileged white guy and you’ll find another school,” does not necessarily solve his feelings of disappointment or frustration. It might exacerbate feelings of resentment towards African-Americans he already held. Similarly, the 3.4 black student may not be as prepared for school and might be unable to make it through the program, owing to the challenges of attempting to make it through a school of intense standards. Perhaps this student might have had better success at a less prestigious school.
Bear in mind, this is in no way stating one race is inherently more intelligent than another. I feel this is obvious, but I worry that my words might be misinterpreted.
Back to my example, hey, we want minorities to be able to reach their dreams. Many do, in fact, come from an underprivileged environment, possibly in some urban school where the educational standards were not as high. This presents a challenge when trying to overcome the disadvantaged position of society. Lowering standards is a sort of an opportunity to get a foot up from that disadvantage. On the other hand, it could also be an opportunity for greater failure. And though the elementary education of the two students in question was not equal, will creating different standards for the same students now at the university-level somehow create equality? Probably not.
I’m not actually trying to say which is better: Affirmative Action or flat rate standards. I am trying to point out that it is a complex issue. Usually, these issues actually require people of different perspectives to find a healthy, lasting solution. Excluding whites, even whites who do not fully understand the nature of white privilege, from the discussion leads to more problems than it solves.
I’d post a clapping pic here, but I already agreed not to do that.
Same difference. Anyway I didn’t have an issue with this post so what would the point be?
I’m saying that he can have an opinion if he wants to. Being white doesn’t make him incompetent or irrelevant when talking about non-white issues. He might not understand the full scope of the experience, but that doesn’t invalidate his opinion.
I agree with all of this, by the way. He can always have an opinion, and he can talk about non-white issues. I’m white too. I’m saying that if a bunch of black people think something is offensive, it might just be offensive despite the white dude who doesn’t think it’s offensive. If there’s any doubt, I’m going to go with the people who have the full scope of the experience.
And as I said, if it’s something ludicrous like Jack Black having to change his name to Jack White, that’s a different story because you aren’t going to find a bunch of black people complaining about that.
If someone is eating an apple and another person is just watching them eat the apple, which one has the more qualified opinion on the quality of that apple?
what exact quality of the apple are you talking about. Without tasting I can still testify to quality of how it looks and smells. Of course I can’t testify as to how it tastes unless I tasted it.
I think this exclusionary attitude again causes resentment both ways. Maybe Warbler doesn’t know about that specific apple, but then, perhaps he could offer a more objective perspective on other qualities of the apple, while the person eating the apple may be overly-concerned with the most salient qualities, such as flavor.
I feel there is plenty of room for multiple races, including the privileged majority, at the table of discussion. I feel like your above post was the first to truly acknowledge that.
Take Affirmative Action as an example. Minorities are not proportionally represented in certain work environments (particularly white color jobs) or in higher levels of education. So institutions might lower their standards for particular races in an effort to create a nominal representation.
But then think of the white guy with the 3.9 GPA who is not admitted to the elite school of his choice, but learns that the black gal with the 3.4 was. He might feel some resentment. Simply saying, “Oh, you’re a privileged white guy and you’ll find another school,” does not necessarily solve his feelings of disappointment or frustration. It might exacerbate feelings of resentment towards African-Americans he already held. Similarly, the 3.4 black student may not be as prepared for school and might be unable to make it through the program, owing to the challenges of attempting to make it through a school of intense standards. Perhaps this student might have had better success at a less prestigious school.
Bear in mind, this is in no way stating one race is inherently more intelligent than another. I feel this is obvious, but I worry that my words might be misinterpreted.
Back to my example, hey, we want minorities to be able to reach their dreams. Many do, in fact, come from an underprivileged environment, possibly in some urban school where the educational standards were not as high. This presents a challenge when trying to overcome the disadvantaged position of society. Lowering standards is a sort of an opportunity to get a foot up from that disadvantage. On the other hand, it could also be an opportunity for greater failure. And though the elementary education of the two students in question was not equal, will creating different standards for the same students now at the university-level somehow create equality? Probably not.
I’m not actually trying to say which is better: Affirmative Action or flat rate standards. I am trying to point out that it is a complex issue. Usually, these issues actually require people of different perspectives to find a healthy, lasting solution. Excluding whites, even whites who do not fully understand the nature of white privilege, from the discussion leads to more problems than it solves.
Affirmative Action is a much more complex (and important) issue than an ESPN commercial that might be offensive. I’m not so quick to write off anyone’s opinion on it. I’m conflicted myself.
So again you’re deciding when an issue complex enough for it to be ok for a white person to have and opinion about it and state it.
Do you think if you keep yelling “GOTCHA!” it will stick one of these times?
I’m saying that he can have an opinion if he wants to. Being white doesn’t make him incompetent or irrelevant when talking about non-white issues. He might not understand the full scope of the experience, but that doesn’t invalidate his opinion.
I agree with all of this, by the way. He can always have an opinion, and he can talk about non-white issues. I’m white too. I’m saying that if a bunch of black people think something is offensive, it might just be offensive despite the white dude who doesn’t think it’s offensive. If there’s any doubt, I’m going to go with the people who have the full scope of the experience.
And as I said, if it’s something ludicrous like Jack Black having to change his name to Jack White, that’s a different story because you aren’t going to find a bunch of black people complaining about that.
Let’s say hypothetically that you could, though. There is a very large contingent of black people that are mad about Jack Black’s name. Would you still say that it’s silly?
Hypothetically, I’d still say I think it’s silly, but I’d also allow for the possibility that I don’t fully understand the situation due to my experiences being different than a black person’s experiences. Yeah, it’s probably still silly, but why do so many black people believe otherwise?
So would you then demand that Jack Black change his name?
I haven’t yet heard why so many black people are offended by his current name.
You didn’t answer the question. We were talking about a hypothetical where very large contingent of black people were mad about the guy’s name.
Read my responses again. I can’t answer the question because I don’t have the relevant information.
ok, you need to know why they are offended, not just that they are offended. Fair enough.
Also what do you mean by “demand Jack Black change his name”? How exactly would I be doing that?
petition? post on facebook/twitter?
