The hidden attack on whiteness
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-10-2014, 04:23 PM
RE: The hidden attack on whiteness
(14-10-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  I don't consider that to be a credible source on anything. His premise, his study, his conclusion, are all dubious and reeking of bias, but that is another topic for another time. What I want is compelling statistics that not only prove it is possible for whites to experience racism, but that whites are are experiencing racism. If it is half a tragic as you paint it out to be there should be many points of compelling data to measure it. If you cannot measure the impact of white racism then I am not going to be compelled to believe it is not a problem.

When you say: "His premise, his study"., who do you mean? This was not a study conducted by Sam Harris. You should probably do more than skim-read things before you form such fervent conclusions. This is simply a study which Sam Harris references in his book.

Secondly, you have asked for "statistics" to prove that it is "possible for white racism to exist"... Do you understand the purpose of statistics? This is such a bizarre request, I have been left somewhat speechless. Are you actually serious in your exchange with me? If so, would you care to explain how statistics could "prove" that "it is possible for white racism to exist"??... Furthermore, I must take it from that request that you are thus skeptical that it is possible for white racism to exist?? In what reality is the existence of white racism an impossible outcome??.. The same logic is applied to your 2nd, newly formed request that the study proves that whites do experience racism. The notion that people don't experience racism if there skin is white is just too bizarre for words... How would skin colour affect their experience?.... Let me just give it to you straight - racism does exist in all different forms. Simple.

(14-10-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  More over the point you have been stressing all long is that white people and racism are synonymous in our culture. You haven't provided evidence for this claim either. In my own experience as a white person I certainty do not feel the victim, so in an anecdotal way I have evidence against your conclusion. If you want me to take you seriously, you have to give me a good reason.

1) Who said I care whether you take me seriously? If you want me to take you seriously, you will stop adapting your argument when it gets dismantled.
2) Now you want evidence for my claim that pop-culture frames racism as white. First let's acknowledge that this is a new request. Secondly, culture and the media is not a static variable, so if you are hoping for hard data, you will be as likely to get it, as you would be if you asked a Muslim to provide evidence that terrorism if framed as Muslim.

(14-10-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  The absence of data supports my claim that whites are not significant vitims of racism. My argument is as follows:

If a group is a target of racism, there will be measurable effects of that racism
X is group targeted for racism
X will show measurable effects of racism

Speaking in general, whites make more money (beat out only by Asians), are well represented in government (by far), and well represented in academia (again losing only to Asians). Whites are the overwhelming majority in top position in fortune 500 companies, property ownership, and voter representation. If you want to make a case that whites are victims of institutional racism in america you have to make a strong case, because there is certainly evidence that they are not.

1) Again, you demonstrate that you don't understand my OP. At no point did I claim that whites are victims of "institutional racism". What I have claimed all along is that there are hidden components within our culture that negatively affect whiteness.
2) You claim there is a lack of data to support white racism - prove it... And once you have done that, show that there is comparatively more data to support other forms of racism (such is your claim).
3) More importantly, if there are hidden components of our culture that negatively affect whiteness, it follows that there will be fewer studies. Not only that, but culture is nuanced and requires qualitative rather than quantitative investigation.

(14-10-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  I do want you to provide me with evidence of racism against whites. I have been saying this literally the whole time. What seems obvious to you is not at all obvious to me, to the point where I am willing to claim that it practically is none existent.

And I have. Not only have you been provided with a study (which you rejected on its description but without actually seeing the study itself) but you have been shown how use of the term "reverse racism" is a culturally accepted term which negatively affects whiteness.

Another example is the culturally accepted term "people of colour" which is a term uniting all peoples apart from whites. We don't have a term for non-indians, so why do we have a term for non-whites? Note a historical explanation will lend no moral credibility to this term.

Of course you could ask me to provide evidence that these terms are "culturally accepted", but then we will have entered into a philosophical discussion and should question how we can truly know anything anyway.

(14-10-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  I understand full well how your 'study' could imply unequal treatment. The challenge for you is to build a bridge there. It is not enough to observe some particular behavior, you have to draw a casual link between the behavior and some outcome. You haven't yet done that, which I why I don't find your source credible to the topic at hand.

Behaviour is outcome. Another weird comment which demonstrates you have not understood the OP.

(14-10-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  I can certainly appreciate how culture is the root cause of racism, considering culture encompasses nearly everything people collectively do and think. If whites do experience racism then it would manifest itself in our culture. You need to demonstrate that as well.
Whether whites experience racism or not is not my OP.... What I am concerned with is whether or not there are racist components of our culture which negatively affect whiteness (whether dormant or not)... I assert that there are and have highlighted them to you on several occasions. The question here is not really whether racism against whiteness exists - we know it does. The question is whether or not it is hidden. I assert that it is. You will sadly not find a study (or statistics) showing that racist components of our culture are hidden. This is a qualitative, nuanced subject. You have to delve deeper than your emotional knee-jerk instincts. Questions like: Does the term "Reverse racism" frame racism as white are appropriate here. If it does, it shows that there are culturally accepted terms which at first glance seem ok but a closer inspection reveals them to be racist. hence they are hidden.

(14-10-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  The reason why I find your study insufficient is because it measures the willingness of people to make pragmatic decisions where race is a factor. What was measured in this experiment is that people are willing to sacrifice the one man for ten when race is not a factor (ie when the sacrificed person was white), and where uncomfortable doing so when race was a factor (when the sacrificed person was not white). This doesn't mean that whites are victims of racism, this merely shows some of the social conditioning present in the test subjects. In the scenario where the sacrifice man was white race is not a factor; white is the de facto assumption and not meaningful in the weighing the consequences. When the sacrificed man is black race is a factor, because competing with the test subjects concern about optimizing the number of saved lives are competing concerns about racial injustice and fairness. Black is not the default assumption in our culture, and so the added detail gets more attention. This isn't evidence of racism, this is evidence that concerns among st liberals over racial justice are just as powerful as pragmatic motivators in this scenario. It demonstrates no more than this. It is insufficient evidence that there is a cultural contributor to racism against whites. It is for these reason that I reject your first source.

All of this is nonsense. You demonstrated your bias by rejecting a study on its description without even having seen the full study. There were signs that you skim-read it by attributing it to "him". I believe you thought this was a study conducted by Sam Harris which would explain your use of the word "him" and thus show that you did not read the study thoroughly.

(14-10-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  The only thing I assume when I use the term "reverse racism" is that reverse racism doesn't exist. I used the term only as long a necessary to dismiss it.

Besides the point. The very fact that this culturally accepted term exists, is evidence that there are components of our culture which frame racism as white. How you claim you use the word is irrelevant.

(14-10-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  In the united states when people here the word racism, immediate association is white racism. That makes sense, whites historically have been the primary perpetrators of racism in america. Whites are both the majority and the privileged race in america. Word association does not constitute discrimination. When someone says "acrobat" my first association is cirque du soleil, that doesn't mean all french men are acrobats or that I am generalizing acrobatics to all french people, it means that this is the context I am most familiar with when I think of acrobatics. For most american who learn about racism in the context of the slave trade, the civil rights movement, and crime data the association is with white racism against black peoples. In another part of the world racism would conjure images of something else. It is no more discriminator there then it is is here. If white people are victims of racism prove it, provide evidence of an inequality or some ill outcome that can be associated with racism.

1) The world is a bigger place than the United States.
2) A historical explanation of an outcome is not a moral justification of that outcome. I made this point clear in my OP. You seek to justify the automatic association of racism with whiteness with prior cause. What you have to remember is that everything has prior cause. Prior cause explains everything. Someone getting abused today could have their situation explained by prior cause. It does not make the abuse they experience any more morally just. There are white people born today who will inherit that association with racism through no fault of their own. my point is that this is wrong.
3) You have also admitted in this paragraph your awareness of the association between whiteness and racism. This revelation shows that all your demands for evidence have been petty seeing as you yourself acknowledge that the association exists.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-10-2014, 04:38 PM
RE: The hidden attack on whiteness
(14-10-2014 03:25 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  I'm merely working off your terms... Exactly what makes you draw limiting factors by my use of white opposed to yourself? You seem fine with asserting what everyone else means in a way that's to your benefit.. That's typical behavior of trolls here.

All I was saying in the first part is how you were drawing conclusions from that data that's not directly distinctly there. You keep doing it to others posts too, its very disingenuous. And I already answered your little question toward the end, your use of inputting "contempt" into another persons position is more of that despicable troll-like behavior.

Here are your exact words: "There should always be cultural contempt for the dominant culture".

Not only that, but as I recall, you described white people as a segment of the population who had been a dominant "force" that we should probably "combat".

This is a very simplistic view that sees white people as homogeneous...... White people are just a bunch of individuals. Grouping races is a man-made construct.

When you stop seeing white people as a homogeneous group, you will see that there is no justification for contempt against them, or anyone else for that matter.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-10-2014, 05:31 PM
RE: The hidden attack on whiteness
(14-10-2014 04:23 PM)Spade=Spade Wrote:  
(14-10-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  I don't consider that to be a credible source on anything. His premise, his study, his conclusion, are all dubious and reeking of bias, but that is another topic for another time. What I want is compelling statistics that not only prove it is possible for whites to experience racism, but that whites are are experiencing racism. If it is half a tragic as you paint it out to be there should be many points of compelling data to measure it. If you cannot measure the impact of white racism then I am not going to be compelled to believe it is not a problem.

When you say: "His premise, his study"., who do you mean? This was not a study conducted by Sam Harris. You should probably do more than skim-read things before you form such fervent conclusions. This is simply a study which Sam Harris references in his book.

Secondly, you have asked for "statistics" to prove that it is "possible for white racism to exist"... Do you understand the purpose of statistics? This is such a bizarre request, I have been left somewhat speechless. Are you actually serious in your exchange with me? If so, would you care to explain how statistics could "prove" that "it is possible for white racism to exist"??... Furthermore, I must take it from that request that you are thus skeptical that it is possible for white racism to exist?? In what reality is the existence of white racism an impossible outcome??.. The same logic is applied to your 2nd, newly formed request that the study proves that whites do experience racism. The notion that people don't experience racism if there skin is white is just too bizarre for words... How would skin colour affect their experience?.... Let me just give it to you straight - racism does exist in all different forms. Simple.

(14-10-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  More over the point you have been stressing all long is that white people and racism are synonymous in our culture. You haven't provided evidence for this claim either. In my own experience as a white person I certainty do not feel the victim, so in an anecdotal way I have evidence against your conclusion. If you want me to take you seriously, you have to give me a good reason.

1) Who said I care whether you take me seriously? If you want me to take you seriously, you will stop adapting your argument when it gets dismantled.
2) Now you want evidence for my claim that pop-culture frames racism as white. First let's acknowledge that this is a new request. Secondly, culture and the media is not a static variable, so if you are hoping for hard data, you will be as likely to get it, as you would be if you asked a Muslim to provide evidence that terrorism if framed as Muslim.

(14-10-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  The absence of data supports my claim that whites are not significant vitims of racism. My argument is as follows:

If a group is a target of racism, there will be measurable effects of that racism
X is group targeted for racism
X will show measurable effects of racism

Speaking in general, whites make more money (beat out only by Asians), are well represented in government (by far), and well represented in academia (again losing only to Asians). Whites are the overwhelming majority in top position in fortune 500 companies, property ownership, and voter representation. If you want to make a case that whites are victims of institutional racism in america you have to make a strong case, because there is certainly evidence that they are not.

1) Again, you demonstrate that you don't understand my OP. At no point did I claim that whites are victims of "institutional racism". What I have claimed all along is that there are hidden components within our culture that negatively affect whiteness.
2) You claim there is a lack of data to support white racism - prove it... And once you have done that, show that there is comparatively more data to support other forms of racism (such is your claim).
3) More importantly, if there are hidden components of our culture that negatively affect whiteness, it follows that there will be fewer studies. Not only that, but culture is nuanced and requires qualitative rather than quantitative investigation.

(14-10-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  I do want you to provide me with evidence of racism against whites. I have been saying this literally the whole time. What seems obvious to you is not at all obvious to me, to the point where I am willing to claim that it practically is none existent.

And I have. Not only have you been provided with a study (which you rejected on its description but without actually seeing the study itself) but you have been shown how use of the term "reverse racism" is a culturally accepted term which negatively affects whiteness.

Another example is the culturally accepted term "people of colour" which is a term uniting all peoples apart from whites. We don't have a term for non-indians, so why do we have a term for non-whites? Note a historical explanation will lend no moral credibility to this term.

Of course you could ask me to provide evidence that these terms are "culturally accepted", but then we will have entered into a philosophical discussion and should question how we can truly know anything anyway.

(14-10-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  I understand full well how your 'study' could imply unequal treatment. The challenge for you is to build a bridge there. It is not enough to observe some particular behavior, you have to draw a casual link between the behavior and some outcome. You haven't yet done that, which I why I don't find your source credible to the topic at hand.

Behaviour is outcome. Another weird comment which demonstrates you have not understood the OP.

(14-10-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  I can certainly appreciate how culture is the root cause of racism, considering culture encompasses nearly everything people collectively do and think. If whites do experience racism then it would manifest itself in our culture. You need to demonstrate that as well.
Whether whites experience racism or not is not my OP.... What I am concerned with is whether or not there are racist components of our culture which negatively affect whiteness (whether dormant or not)... I assert that there are and have highlighted them to you on several occasions. The question here is not really whether racism against whiteness exists - we know it does. The question is whether or not it is hidden. I assert that it is. You will sadly not find a study (or statistics) showing that racist components of our culture are hidden. This is a qualitative, nuanced subject. You have to delve deeper than your emotional knee-jerk instincts. Questions like: Does the term "Reverse racism" frame racism as white are appropriate here. If it does, it shows that there are culturally accepted terms which at first glance seem ok but a closer inspection reveals them to be racist. hence they are hidden.

(14-10-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  The reason why I find your study insufficient is because it measures the willingness of people to make pragmatic decisions where race is a factor. What was measured in this experiment is that people are willing to sacrifice the one man for ten when race is not a factor (ie when the sacrificed person was white), and where uncomfortable doing so when race was a factor (when the sacrificed person was not white). This doesn't mean that whites are victims of racism, this merely shows some of the social conditioning present in the test subjects. In the scenario where the sacrifice man was white race is not a factor; white is the de facto assumption and not meaningful in the weighing the consequences. When the sacrificed man is black race is a factor, because competing with the test subjects concern about optimizing the number of saved lives are competing concerns about racial injustice and fairness. Black is not the default assumption in our culture, and so the added detail gets more attention. This isn't evidence of racism, this is evidence that concerns among st liberals over racial justice are just as powerful as pragmatic motivators in this scenario. It demonstrates no more than this. It is insufficient evidence that there is a cultural contributor to racism against whites. It is for these reason that I reject your first source.

All of this is nonsense. You demonstrated your bias by rejecting a study on its description without even having seen the full study. There were signs that you skim-read it by attributing it to "him". I believe you thought this was a study conducted by Sam Harris which would explain your use of the word "him" and thus show that you did not read the study thoroughly.

(14-10-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  The only thing I assume when I use the term "reverse racism" is that reverse racism doesn't exist. I used the term only as long a necessary to dismiss it.

Besides the point. The very fact that this culturally accepted term exists, is evidence that there are components of our culture which frame racism as white. How you claim you use the word is irrelevant.

(14-10-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  In the united states when people here the word racism, immediate association is white racism. That makes sense, whites historically have been the primary perpetrators of racism in america. Whites are both the majority and the privileged race in america. Word association does not constitute discrimination. When someone says "acrobat" my first association is cirque du soleil, that doesn't mean all french men are acrobats or that I am generalizing acrobatics to all french people, it means that this is the context I am most familiar with when I think of acrobatics. For most american who learn about racism in the context of the slave trade, the civil rights movement, and crime data the association is with white racism against black peoples. In another part of the world racism would conjure images of something else. It is no more discriminator there then it is is here. If white people are victims of racism prove it, provide evidence of an inequality or some ill outcome that can be associated with racism.

1) The world is a bigger place than the United States.
2) A historical explanation of an outcome is not a moral justification of that outcome. I made this point clear in my OP. You seek to justify the automatic association of racism with whiteness with prior cause. What you have to remember is that everything has prior cause. Prior cause explains everything. Someone getting abused today could have their situation explained by prior cause. It does not make the abuse they experience any more morally just. There are white people born today who will inherit that association with racism through no fault of their own. my point is that this is wrong.
3) You have also admitted in this paragraph your awareness of the association between whiteness and racism. This revelation shows that all your demands for evidence have been petty seeing as you yourself acknowledge that the association exists.

I never said racism against whites cannot exist or even doesn't exist. I said that, compared to racism against other groups in the United States, it is comparatively insignificant and inconsequential. I can support that with evidence. Your "hidden attack on whiteness" seems to amount to nothing more than hurt feelings. It is so insidious, so obscured, so difficult to study that it is almost as if it doesn't exist in the first place... I am struggling to find a reason to care.

I read your source.... again. Other than the singular study quoted in the whole article, which you re quoted in your posts, it is only series of assertions about values and morality. The one portion you quoted was the only bit that in anyway pertained to our discussion. I explained why I object to the conclusion you draw from that study. I would offer that if you repeated the study, but instead of the variable being the race of the sacrificed person, you asked substituting the man for a child, or for someone who is disabled, that you will get a similar skew. When you complicate the moral question by introducing competing values you are obviously going to get some variance on the answer. That fact that liberals were more swayed by the race of the person speaks only the values of the liberals, it doesn't not speak to racism. You have to do better than that. Your evidence is woefully insufficient.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Michael_Tadlock's post
14-10-2014, 10:13 PM (This post was last modified: 14-10-2014 10:16 PM by ClydeLee.)
RE: The hidden attack on whiteness
(14-10-2014 04:38 PM)Spade=Spade Wrote:  
(14-10-2014 03:25 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  I'm merely working off your terms... Exactly what makes you draw limiting factors by my use of white opposed to yourself? You seem fine with asserting what everyone else means in a way that's to your benefit.. That's typical behavior of trolls here.

All I was saying in the first part is how you were drawing conclusions from that data that's not directly distinctly there. You keep doing it to others posts too, its very disingenuous. And I already answered your little question toward the end, your use of inputting "contempt" into another persons position is more of that despicable troll-like behavior.

Here are your exact words: "There should always be cultural contempt for the dominant culture".

Not only that, but as I recall, you described white people as a segment of the population who had been a dominant "force" that we should probably "combat".

This is a very simplistic view that sees white people as homogeneous...... White people are just a bunch of individuals. Grouping races is a man-made construct.

When you stop seeing white people as a homogeneous group, you will see that there is no justification for contempt against them, or anyone else for that matter.

I'm literally using the words you have used prior.. to elaborate how your point sounds in contrast. I'm not saying whites are a homogeneous group any more or less than you are. You are entirely disingenuous to think otherwise because I am merely repeating your terms to equate to your discussion. You are calling my views, which are entirely using YOUR terms, simplistic when I use them, but not when you use them. The limited mental exploration here is very impressive. I wouldn't be discussing any of these points in an idealistically irrelevant point of race since it's a non-rational distinction, but I am not ignoring that it has a cultural understanding.

My ideal world, as explained to you pretty easily before, would not consist of a dominant force. And any noting of taking serious, a point of being in an ideal world is a juvenile thought. It would always require a state of constant effort to maintain.

Here's an idea I would say that would also be key for better communication in our real world.. not having people of your manner inferring some cynical meaning and intent behind other peoples common discussion. I'm not writing any of my literary of philosophical, very heavily metaphoric and dual meaning lingering texts, I'm trying to discuss with you on your terms... don't interpret them as loaded if you want to be seen as a sensible person.

Again.. to get closer to what I think you're off base with. It's a presumption it's a hidden agenda by you. You don't demonstrate any of this other than assertion.. and you flat out refute without reason why other peoples evaluations of this concept is wrong. You don't respond in an open manner, instead you manipulate others responses. It's just as valid to me that for one, this isn't a hidden approach in the culture, it's a growing cultural movement lead by intentional efforts of many to make people aware of social imbalance. That includes acknowledging racism as we call it goes across boundaries and that a unjust beneficial scenario shouldn't be accepted without merit.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like ClydeLee's post
15-10-2014, 01:44 AM
RE: The hidden attack on whiteness
Right, so Spade is still making mountains out of mole hills with his selective reading and interpretation of one study? Drinking Beverage

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-10-2014, 02:10 AM
RE: The hidden attack on whiteness
(15-10-2014 01:44 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Right, so Spade is still making mountains out of mole hills with his selective reading and interpretation of one study? Drinking Beverage

Well ya know, to a mole, a molehill looks like a mountain Tongue

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-10-2014, 02:19 AM
RE: The hidden attack on whiteness
(15-10-2014 01:44 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Right, so Spade is still making mountains out of mole hills with his selective reading and interpretation of one study? Drinking Beverage

One study?
I wasn't asked to produce multiple studies. I was asked to support the assertion that white racism exists.

Selective reading and interpretation?
Back up this accusation please. I provided evidence that white racism exists. I did not read into the study myself. I left that part for Michael Tadlock an co.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-10-2014, 02:22 AM
RE: The hidden attack on whiteness
(14-10-2014 10:13 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(14-10-2014 04:38 PM)Spade=Spade Wrote:  Here are your exact words: "There should always be cultural contempt for the dominant culture".

Not only that, but as I recall, you described white people as a segment of the population who had been a dominant "force" that we should probably "combat".

This is a very simplistic view that sees white people as homogeneous...... White people are just a bunch of individuals. Grouping races is a man-made construct.

When you stop seeing white people as a homogeneous group, you will see that there is no justification for contempt against them, or anyone else for that matter.

I'm literally using the words you have used prior.. to elaborate how your point sounds in contrast. I'm not saying whites are a homogeneous group any more or less than you are. You are entirely disingenuous to think otherwise because I am merely repeating your terms to equate to your discussion. You are calling my views, which are entirely using YOUR terms, simplistic when I use them, but not when you use them. The limited mental exploration here is very impressive. I wouldn't be discussing any of these points in an idealistically irrelevant point of race since it's a non-rational distinction, but I am not ignoring that it has a cultural understanding.

My ideal world, as explained to you pretty easily before, would not consist of a dominant force. And any noting of taking serious, a point of being in an ideal world is a juvenile thought. It would always require a state of constant effort to maintain.

Here's an idea I would say that would also be key for better communication in our real world.. not having people of your manner inferring some cynical meaning and intent behind other peoples common discussion. I'm not writing any of my literary of philosophical, very heavily metaphoric and dual meaning lingering texts, I'm trying to discuss with you on your terms... don't interpret them as loaded if you want to be seen as a sensible person.

Again.. to get closer to what I think you're off base with. It's a presumption it's a hidden agenda by you. You don't demonstrate any of this other than assertion.. and you flat out refute without reason why other peoples evaluations of this concept is wrong. You don't respond in an open manner, instead you manipulate others responses. It's just as valid to me that for one, this isn't a hidden approach in the culture, it's a growing cultural movement lead by intentional efforts of many to make people aware of social imbalance. That includes acknowledging racism as we call it goes across boundaries and that a unjust beneficial scenario shouldn't be accepted without merit.

You claim you are "literally "using the words I have used prior"? This is false.
You described whites as a "force" that should be "combated". Not me. Don't get sour when you get called out on such silly additions the conversation.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-10-2014, 02:49 AM (This post was last modified: 15-10-2014 04:18 AM by Spade=Spade.)
RE: The hidden attack on whiteness
(14-10-2014 05:31 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  I never said racism against whites cannot exist or even doesn't exist. I said that, compared to racism against other groups in the United States, it is comparatively insignificant and inconsequential. I can support that with evidence. Your "hidden attack on whiteness" seems to amount to nothing more than hurt feelings. It is so insidious, so obscured, so difficult to study that it is almost as if it doesn't exist in the first place... I am struggling to find a reason to care.

I read your source.... again. Other than the singular study quoted in the whole article, which you re quoted in your posts, it is only series of assertions about values and morality. The one portion you quoted was the only bit that in anyway pertained to our discussion. I explained why I object to the conclusion you draw from that study. I would offer that if you repeated the study, but instead of the variable being the race of the sacrificed person, you asked substituting the man for a child, or for someone who is disabled, that you will get a similar skew. When you complicate the moral question by introducing competing values you are obviously going to get some variance on the answer. That fact that liberals were more swayed by the race of the person speaks only the values of the liberals, it doesn't not speak to racism. You have to do better than that. Your evidence is woefully insufficient.

1) You seem to be switching between demanding evidence to "prove" white racism is possible and actually experienced and then saying that you acknowledge that it exists but feel it is comparatively inconsequential. This is what I mean when I say you adapt your argument as soon as it is dismantled.

2) As we have discussed a few times already, pointing to the greater severity of black racism does nothing to invalidate the assertion that white racism exists and is worthy of mention. Whether or not you think it is minor is again, irrelevant. I wonder whether you would tell an Indian or Asian person that racism against them is insignificant... The point is that the stringent resistance you have put up is suggestive of the very discrepancy I have been tried to bring to the surface.

3) Your rejection of the study is demonstrative of bias seeing you have only read the descriptive overview of the study and immediately drawn conclusions which (surprise, surprise) suit your argument. If we had the full study between us and you could actually read the nuts and bolts of it, your conclusion would be more credible.

4) You say I have provided a "singular" study as if I was supposed to provide many but have only been able to produce one. A bit silly since we know that white racism and white stereotypes do exist, but if I must have the unique task of producing multiple studies to support an assertion that a particular brand of racism exists, I will oblige. Here is another study. This time it is in full, so you actually have something beyond the descriptive overview to go on when you form your conclusion: http://www.indiana.edu/~atlantic/wp-cont...ntexts.pdf

5) To ensure we don't deviate too far from what my original point was, here are some quick-fire bullets to remind you what I am arguing for:
- White stereotypes exist
- They are unique in that they are hidden (overlooked) and thus worthy of discussion
- This is a criticism of culture, not people.
- The greater severity of black racism does not disprove the existence of white racism.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-10-2014, 02:56 AM
RE: The hidden attack on whiteness
Just remember folks, 'conspiracy' (or 'hidden' in this case) is the klaxon call of those who lack sufficient evidence for their preferred conclusions.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: