The hidden attack on whiteness
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-11-2014, 04:50 PM
RE: The hidden attack on whiteness
(10-11-2014 04:45 PM)Spade=Spade Wrote:  
(10-11-2014 03:33 PM)cjlr Wrote:  You're insisting I modify my claim from one thing I didn't actually claim to another thing I didn't actually claim?

And you think that's productive?
Wow... I didn't think you would resort to just plain lying, but I guess I gave you too much credit.

The thing you now say you didn't claim was your EXACT words and the other thing you now say you didn't claim was (you guessed it)... your EXACT words.

Your interpretation of my words is irrelevant.

My interpretation of my own words is what matters here.

You, initially, misunderstood me. I attempted to correct you.

You steadfastly refuse to listen to those corrections and insist, despite all logic, reason, and honesty, that your interpretation stands. This is delusional.

(10-11-2014 04:45 PM)Spade=Spade Wrote:  Perhaps this will refresh your memory:

The first claim you now say you never actually made...
(10-11-2014 03:33 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Remember when I offered you my response to this, ah, stunning revelation?

If you've forgotten, it was so what?, because, you know, literally no one has denied this. Thanks.

The other claim you now say you never actually made...
(10-11-2014 03:33 PM)cjlr Wrote:  my comment, in this thread, was to be taken as referring to this thread

PS: I had to look hard for that first quote seeing as you have now deleted the other one... Thought I wouldn't notice eh? Laughat

What did I delete? What "other one"?

No, I'm genuinely curious. What did I delete?

As far as I can tell, you imagined a comment, went to look for it, couldn't find it, and now have yourself convinced that I "deleted it"...

Have you considered visiting a mental health professional?

(10-11-2014 04:45 PM)Spade=Spade Wrote:  
(10-11-2014 03:33 PM)cjlr Wrote:  I shall make this explicit one more time, because you apparently haven't bothered processing any of those pages of "discussion". I find that the part of your OP and subsequent claims that is reasonable. I find your repeated insistence that white stereotypes are denied to be farcical. There; do you understand the difference?
I'm reminded of the expression "Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty but the pig likes it."... You're the pig in this analogy by the way.

So... I can't help but notice that you're not acknowledging what I said. I offer you two possible interpretations...

Either you remain unable to comprehend what I've written, and your blockheaded mischaracterisation is both inadvertent and unassailable - or you do finally comprehend what I've now written, and are to pathetically stubborn to admit it.

Let me know which is more accurate, okay?

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
10-11-2014, 05:25 PM
RE: The hidden attack on whiteness
(10-11-2014 04:50 PM)cjlr Wrote:  You steadfastly refuse to listen to those corrections and insist, despite all logic, reason, and honesty, that your interpretation stands. This is delusional.
Hmmm... so what, pray tell, would be the correct interpretation of your claim that this was the "entire position" I was arguing??

Wouldn't you agree that it would be silly to say: "the entire position Spade is arguing against is that no one in this thread has denied the existence of white stereotypes"?

Hint: The 2 phrases in bold are not compatible.

(10-11-2014 04:50 PM)cjlr Wrote:  What did I delete? What "other one"?

No, I'm genuinely curious. What did I delete?

You know what? I made a mistake. I suspected you had deleted a post, but on 2nd inspection, it is there... It's a good thing I am not too emotionally invested in my mistakes or I might find myself in a hole I am too embarrassed to publicly step out of...

See what I did there? Thumbsup

Here's is the original quote I was looking for...
(10-11-2014 04:50 PM)cjlr Wrote:  That white people are generally advantaged does not mean that they are never disadvantaged, and as far as I am aware nobody has ever made that claim.

You said earlier that you never actually made this claim... Well you actually did make this claim.... But you knew that already Wink

(10-11-2014 04:50 PM)cjlr Wrote:  So... I can't help but notice that you're not acknowledging what I said. I offer you two possible interpretations...

Either you remain unable to comprehend what I've written, and your blockheaded mischaracterisation is both inadvertent and unassailable - or you do finally comprehend what I've now written, and are to pathetically stubborn to admit it.

Let me know which is more accurate, okay?

Actually, there's a 3rd, more accurate interpretation... I find you as tedious as you find me and see no benefit in explaining myself yet again to someone who has demonstrated themselves (rather emphatically) to be dishonest.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-11-2014, 05:48 PM
RE: The hidden attack on whiteness
(10-11-2014 05:25 PM)Spade=Spade Wrote:  
(10-11-2014 04:50 PM)cjlr Wrote:  You steadfastly refuse to listen to those corrections and insist, despite all logic, reason, and honesty, that your interpretation stands. This is delusional.
Hmmm... so what, pray tell, would be the correct interpretation of your claim that this was the "entire position" I was arguing??

Your OP is predicated on the bizarre idea that "white stereotypes" (never all that well defined by you) were not only real (note: everyone granted this) but somehow overlooked and minimised (note: this was disputed). You made this thesis abundantly clear in your responses to others throughout the thread.

That you can't, in fact, parse what other people are saying (see some choice pull quotes above) has at least been at times entertaining for the rest of us.

That you aspire to a priggish masterclass in hypocritical sanctimony has been rather less endearing. But that's your prerogative, I guess.

(10-11-2014 05:25 PM)Spade=Spade Wrote:  Wouldn't you agree that it would be silly to say: "the entire position Spade is arguing against is that no one in this thread has denied the existence of white stereotypes"?

Hint: The 2 phrases in bold are not compatible.

Is that supposed to be relevant?

(10-11-2014 05:25 PM)Spade=Spade Wrote:  
(10-11-2014 04:50 PM)cjlr Wrote:  What did I delete? What "other one"?

No, I'm genuinely curious. What did I delete?

You know what? I made a mistake. I suspected you had deleted a post, but on 2nd inspection, it is there... It's a good thing I am not too emotionally invested in my mistakes or I might find myself in a hole I am too embarrassed to publicly step out of...

See what I did there? Thumbsup

Ah! Now, that is something to take note of. If only you'd backtrack on all the other ridiculous claims and mischaracterisation, we'd be making real progress here!

Now that you've demonstrably once been convinced despite facts that others have deleted posts, might we consider that something similar has happened on the numerous occasions on which you've been "convinced" that others have "changed" what they "meant"?

Since we now both grant that it's possible...

(10-11-2014 05:25 PM)Spade=Spade Wrote:  Here's is the original quote I was looking for...
(10-11-2014 04:50 PM)cjlr Wrote:  That white people are generally advantaged does not mean that they are never disadvantaged, and as far as I am aware nobody has ever made that claim.

You said earlier that you never actually made this claim... Well you actually did make this claim.... But you knew that already Wink

Aaaand once again you're going to fellate a dead horse by insisting - despite what I've told you - that this statement "means" (according to you) something I not only never intended it to but something I have repeatedly made clear that I never intended?

Whoops. We're back to delusion-town. Damn.

(10-11-2014 05:25 PM)Spade=Spade Wrote:  
(10-11-2014 04:50 PM)cjlr Wrote:  So... I can't help but notice that you're not acknowledging what I said. I offer you two possible interpretations...

Either you remain unable to comprehend what I've written, and your blockheaded mischaracterisation is both inadvertent and unassailable - or you do finally comprehend what I've now written, and are to pathetically stubborn to admit it.

Let me know which is more accurate, okay?

Actually, there's a 3rd, more accurate interpretation... I find you as tedious as you find me and see no benefit in explaining myself yet again to someone who has demonstrated themselves (rather emphatically) to be dishonest.

Funny; perhaps we should put that to a vote? I'm willing to let the audience weigh in and see who's come across as more dishonest or clueless. I mean, you're the one explicitly referred to as such multiple times throughout the thread, not me - but shall we ask the crowd?

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like cjlr's post
10-11-2014, 06:20 PM
RE: The hidden attack on whiteness
(10-11-2014 05:48 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Your OP is predicated on the bizarre idea that "white stereotypes" (never all that well defined by you) were not only real (note: everyone granted this) but somehow overlooked and minimised (note: this was disputed). You made this thesis abundantly clear in your responses to others throughout the thread.

Funny... Seems like your interpretation of my words is inaccurate. Perhaps I should drone on about straw men or phantasmal arguments.

And of course, yet again, you haven't answered my question or grasped the point (probably intentionally).

(10-11-2014 04:50 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(10-11-2014 05:25 PM)Spade=Spade Wrote:  Wouldn't you agree that it would be silly to say: "the entire position Spade is arguing against is that no one in this thread has denied the existence of white stereotypes"?

Hint: The 2 phrases in bold are not compatible.

Is that supposed to be relevant?
Uh, yeah... You claimed both, but the problem is they don't work together... So which one do you retain and which one do you admit to being a mistake?

I think I know the answer...

(10-11-2014 04:50 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Ah! Now, that is something to take note of. If only you'd backtrack on all the other ridiculous claims and mischaracterisation, we'd be making real progress here!

Now that you've demonstrably once been convinced despite facts that others have deleted posts, might we consider that something similar has happened on the numerous occasions on which you've been "convinced" that others have "changed" what they "meant"?

Since we now both grant that it's possible...

Haha - mistakes are always "possible" pal, in fact they're inevitable. The trick is to admit them when you make them (cough HINT cough cough).

I suspected you had deleted a post (because you have consistently demonstrated to me that you are very dishonest). I was mistaken however and I have since admitted that.

The only loose end is the following notion:

"The entire position Spade is arguing against, is that no one in this thread has denied the existence of white stereotypes."

This line demonstrates your dishonesty. If you claim the first bold phrase (as indeed you did), then your (now amended) 2nd bold phrase doesn't fit... You have had ample opportunity to admit your mistake in this regard but have chosen not to and it seems likely you never will.

(10-11-2014 04:50 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(10-11-2014 05:25 PM)Spade=Spade Wrote:  Here's is the original quote I was looking for...

You said earlier that you never actually made this claim... Well you actually did make this claim.... But you knew that already Wink

Aaaand once again you're going to fellate a dead horse by insisting - despite what I've told you - that this statement "means" (according to you) something I not only never intended it to but something I have repeatedly made clear that I never intended?

Whoops. We're back to delusion-town. Damn.

All I did, is paste EXACTLY what you wrote and somehow I'm delusional.

You said you "didn't actually claim" that. I pasted your EXACT wording to show that you DID actually claim that.... And you call this delusion-town?

Starting to see why I call you dishonest? Good.

(10-11-2014 04:50 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Funny; perhaps we should put that to a vote? I'm willing to let the audience weigh in and see who's come across as more dishonest or clueless. I mean, you're the one explicitly referred to as such multiple times throughout the thread, not me - but shall we ask the crowd?
Haha - the words of a defeated man. Go for it then pal. Let's hope your buddies can make you feel better. Thumbsup
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-11-2014, 07:45 PM
RE: The hidden attack on whiteness
The point of bringing up class-ism is because you've never proven AT ALL what you're speaking of isn't actually socially fueled by class-ism over racism... or that they actually are deeply separated. you say, you're only talking about racism charged elements but you never give any logical clear examples or research to demonstrate it's existing and harm. You seem to be unaware of this too. The few links you have brought to the table didn't clearly indicate race over other social factors.

Constantly claiming other ideas or peoples words have other messages within them is a pattern you have all throughout this thread. I am curious why you do this? Why do you assume the words attack is so harshly used that you mistitled the thread? Why do you think someone is attacking you by disagreeing while happening to be using a "combative" term in their verbage is attacking you? Is that a threat of anyway, how is it an attack? How is someone like cjlr not wrong when claiming you interpenetrated him wrong but you aren't wrong in interpenetrating others wrong? How is it you conclude by a rational means when I talk about whiteness or culture I am asserting PEOPLE, but when you use whiteness or culture you're not talking about people?

You make claims after claims... without rational, logical, or evaluated reasons to accept these claims you keep proposing. Idk.. is this an attack against you also? You seem fickle about that so I'm not sure if pointing out your misbehavior is an attack or not since I'm not sure how I've attacked you opposed to what you've said at me.

"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
10-11-2014, 11:41 PM
RE: The hidden attack on whiteness
(10-11-2014 06:20 PM)Spade=Spade Wrote:  
(10-11-2014 04:50 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Is that supposed to be relevant?
Uh, yeah... You claimed both, but the problem is they don't work together... So which one do you retain and which one do you admit to being a mistake?

I think I know the answer...

Indeed.

Your mother.

Is there any point in repeating myself? Arguing against what you think I said, rather than what I actually said, is a waste of both of our time. Apparently you disagree.

(10-11-2014 06:20 PM)Spade=Spade Wrote:  
(10-11-2014 04:50 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Ah! Now, that is something to take note of. If only you'd backtrack on all the other ridiculous claims and mischaracterisation, we'd be making real progress here!

Now that you've demonstrably once been convinced despite facts that others have deleted posts, might we consider that something similar has happened on the numerous occasions on which you've been "convinced" that others have "changed" what they "meant"?

Since we now both grant that it's possible...

Haha - mistakes are always "possible" pal, in fact they're inevitable. The trick is to admit them when you make them (cough HINT cough cough).

I'll let you know when I've made one, then. How's that?

(10-11-2014 06:20 PM)Spade=Spade Wrote:  I suspected you had deleted a post (because you have consistently demonstrated to me that you are very dishonest). I was mistaken however and I have since admitted that.

Dishonest, eh? I don't know; I rather think dishonesty might be characterised in part by persistent willful mischaracterisation of others. But hold that thought.

(10-11-2014 06:20 PM)Spade=Spade Wrote:  The only loose end is the following notion:

"The entire position Spade is arguing against, is that no one in this thread has denied the existence of white stereotypes."

This line demonstrates your dishonesty. If you claim the first bold phrase (as indeed you did), then your (now amended) 2nd bold phrase doesn't fit... You have had ample opportunity to admit your mistake in this regard but have chosen not to and it seems likely you never will.

No mistake, actually, but given your remedial reading comprehension...

Do you, or do you not, maintain the claims made in your OP and subsequent responses?

I'd invite you to review the thread and reconsider your straw men in light of others' actual words and intentions, but I think we both know you're rather keep wallowing in self-righteousness.

(10-11-2014 06:20 PM)Spade=Spade Wrote:  
(10-11-2014 04:50 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Aaaand once again you're going to fellate a dead horse by insisting - despite what I've told you - that this statement "means" (according to you) something I not only never intended it to but something I have repeatedly made clear that I never intended?

Whoops. We're back to delusion-town. Damn.

All I did, is paste EXACTLY what you wrote and somehow I'm delusional.

You said you "didn't actually claim" that. I pasted your EXACT wording to show that you DID actually claim that.... And you call this delusion-town?

Starting to see why I call you dishonest? Good.

I'm glad you returned to this. Tripling down on full retard is not helpful, but whatever gets you through the night, I suppose.

I've explained - in tedious, repetitive detail - why what you think I "must have meant" was not, in fact, what I actually meant. And indeed, if either of the two of us might be said to possess a better understanding of what I was thinking when I wrote that, my money is, incidentally, not on you. I've told you this many times over. I've explained to you that clinging desperately to such misrepresentation even after being repeatedly corrected is not a winning character trait.

That you refuse to accept that is, while quite unfortunate for you, beyond my control. Oh, well.

(10-11-2014 06:20 PM)Spade=Spade Wrote:  
(10-11-2014 04:50 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Funny; perhaps we should put that to a vote? I'm willing to let the audience weigh in and see who's come across as more dishonest or clueless. I mean, you're the one explicitly referred to as such multiple times throughout the thread, not me - but shall we ask the crowd?
Haha - the words of a defeated man. Go for it then pal. Let's hope your buddies can make you feel better. Thumbsup

No, merely a weary observation that you're an evidently disingenuous blowhard with a massive chip on your shoulder. Feel free to commence raving about how everyone's out to get you; it would be an entertaining new tack to try. The greater fool I, for attempting to actually speak with you.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
11-11-2014, 03:45 PM
RE: The hidden attack on whiteness
(10-11-2014 07:45 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  The point of bringing up class-ism is because you've never proven AT ALL what you're speaking of isn't actually socially fueled by class-ism over racism.
Sociological claims can't really be "proven". So there's that... But if you're saying that I haven't shown that white stereotypes aren't in fact socially fuelled by classism over racism, then I guess anyone could say the same thing about black stereotypes... How do we know that black stereotypes aren't actually socially fuelled by classism over racism??

(10-11-2014 07:45 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  .. or that they actually are deeply separated. you say, you're only talking about racism charged elements but you never give any logical clear examples or research to demonstrate it's existing and harm. You seem to be unaware of this too. The few links you have brought to the table didn't clearly indicate race over other social factors.

Hmmm, well let's review things here...

You say that that I "never give any logical clear examples or research to demonstrate its existence and harm".

Dealing with "existence" first, I have provided 2 studies which both hinge on the existence of white racism.

Here (again) is a link to the first study (read paragraph 8): http://www.samharris.org/site/full_text/...man-values

And here (again) is a link to the second study: http://www.indiana.edu/~atlantic/wp-cont...ntexts.pdf

These two studies provide evidence supporting the existence of white racism/ stereotypes.

Now let's deal with the other claim that I haven't provided any "logical, clear examples" which demonstrate that white stereotypes can cause harm.

Subsequent to providing the 2 studies above, I provided the following report which highlights my argument: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sou...e-28939089

Scroll down to the paragraph entitled "Racism fear"... You will read that council staff cited "fear of being labelled a racist" as the reason they didn't pursue reports of rape. This shows that it is conceivable that white stereotypes can lead to negative outcomes/ harm... How many girls might have been saved from rape over the course of 16 years in Rotherham if the council workers weren't afraid of being called a racist for pursuing reports against Asian men?

So it would seem I have actually provided examples demonstrating the existence and harm of white stereotypes. You would know that if you did what you have accused me of not doing - reading what the other person has written.

(10-11-2014 07:45 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Why do you assume the words attack is so harshly used that you mistitled the thread?
Do you remember when I wrote this?

Spade=spade Wrote:The title of the OP is (I have realised) somewhat badly worded... The word "attack" implies conscious intent. It makes for good click-bait but in truth I should re-word that as it doesn't accurately express my point. Racism against whiteness (like all other forms of racism) is very often unconscious. Hence its longevity. Culture simply frowns on certain forms of prejudice but not others. If we want a happier world, we should be constantly looking to tweak areas of societal life for the better. Amending our culture so that whiteness isn't constantly associated with racism might just be one such tweak we could make... So apologies for using the word "attack" in the title. I think it put certain posters on the wrong foot and this is my fault.

You know, because if something has been badly worded, it is the fault of the person who used the words... Look at the words in bold in the above paragraph. Do you see how they show that I took responsibility for wording things badly?? Feel free to pick up some tips here.

Juuuuuuust gonna throw that one out there!


(10-11-2014 07:45 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  How is someone like cjlr not wrong when claiming you interpenetrated him wrong but you aren't wrong in interpenetrating others wrong?
Hmmmmm - did you not see the part where I said I was wrong for using words that others might misinterpret?? Maybe you should read the above paragraph again... Whose fault is it if I have worded something badly?? Mine... The same principle applies to you and cjlr.

(10-11-2014 07:45 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  You make claims after claims... without rational, logical, or evaluated reasons to accept these claims you keep proposing. Idk.. is this an attack against you also? You seem fickle about that so I'm not sure if pointing out your misbehavior is an attack or not since I'm not sure how I've attacked you opposed to what you've said at me.

Actually, I have only really made 3 core claims as follows:

1) White stereotypes exist in our culture
2) They are overlooked relative to other stereotypes
3) They can conceivably lead to negative outcomes

Points 1 & 3 have been supported with evidence. Point 2 has simply been discussed.

But don't worry about the attacking thing anymore... I took the gloves off a while ago. This thread has descended into a playground spat and I just decided to roll with it. Smile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-11-2014, 04:00 PM
RE: The hidden attack on whiteness
(10-11-2014 11:41 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(10-11-2014 06:20 PM)Spade=Spade Wrote:  Uh, yeah... You claimed both, but the problem is they don't work together... So which one do you retain and which one do you admit to being a mistake?

I think I know the answer...

Indeed.

Your mother.

Is there any point in repeating myself? Arguing against what you think I said, rather than what I actually said, is a waste of both of our time. Apparently you disagree.
I just asked you a question. Nothing more... Buuuut if you would prefer to avoid answering it, I don't blame you.

(10-11-2014 11:41 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(10-11-2014 06:20 PM)Spade=Spade Wrote:  Haha - mistakes are always "possible" pal, in fact they're inevitable. The trick is to admit them when you make them (cough HINT cough cough).

I'll let you know when I've made one, then. How's that?
Don't bother.

(10-11-2014 11:41 PM)cjlr Wrote:  I've explained - in tedious, repetitive detail - why what you think I "must have meant" was not, in fact, what I actually meant. And indeed, if either of the two of us might be said to possess a better understanding of what I was thinking when I wrote that, my money is, incidentally, not on you. I've told you this many times over. I've explained to you that clinging desperately to such misrepresentation even after being repeatedly corrected is not a winning character trait.
yawn...

That's all well and good except for the part (ages ago) when I accepted that you meant "in this thread"... Read that again... I accepted your meaning.

"Literally no one ever" was meant to mean "Literally no one ever in this thread"... obviously.

My question to you since, has been: will you now retract your other statement that "the entire position" I am arguing against is that no one in this thread has denied the existence of white stereotypes?

But don't bother answering that question... If you wanted to answer it, you would have done it ages ago when I first brought it up. Clearly you would prefer to avoid it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-11-2014, 04:07 PM (This post was last modified: 11-11-2014 04:16 PM by cjlr.)
RE: The hidden attack on whiteness
(11-11-2014 04:00 PM)Spade=Spade Wrote:  My question to you since, has been: will you now retract your other statement that "the entire position" I am arguing against is that no one in this thread has denied the existence of white stereotypes?

But don't bother answering that question... If you wanted to answer it, you would have done it ages ago when I first brought it up. Clearly you would prefer to avoid it.

No. Your point, in your OP, was that people - a nebulous, ill-defined, vague "people" - do. Various responses to you disagreed with this contention, which you never really attempted to substantiate.

The context of my comment was that you seemed bound and determined to misinterpret people in this thread. I asked you, indirectly I grant, who you were arguing against, and you explicitly referred to people doing so in this thread.

Which is all well and good - except for the part where it's not true - but you can't exactly claim to have started the thread to respond to people who only posted responses in the thread you started after you started it. Do you see the problem with that?

If you'd like me to say I was being flippant, sure, guilty as charged. Seeing you consistently misinterpret others in the first half of the thread did not exactly engender a positive impression.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
11-11-2014, 04:56 PM
RE: The hidden attack on whiteness
(11-11-2014 03:45 PM)Spade=Spade Wrote:  
(10-11-2014 07:45 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  The point of bringing up class-ism is because you've never proven AT ALL what you're speaking of isn't actually socially fueled by class-ism over racism.
Sociological claims can't really be "proven". So there's that... But if you're saying that I haven't shown that white stereotypes aren't in fact socially fuelled by classism over racism, then I guess anyone could say the same thing about black stereotypes... How do we know that black stereotypes aren't actually socially fuelled by classism over racism??

(10-11-2014 07:45 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  .. or that they actually are deeply separated. you say, you're only talking about racism charged elements but you never give any logical clear examples or research to demonstrate it's existing and harm. You seem to be unaware of this too. The few links you have brought to the table didn't clearly indicate race over other social factors.

Hmmm, well let's review things here...

You say that that I "never give any logical clear examples or research to demonstrate its existence and harm".

Dealing with "existence" first, I have provided 2 studies which both hinge on the existence of white racism.

Here (again) is a link to the first study (read paragraph 8): http://www.samharris.org/site/full_text/...man-values

And here (again) is a link to the second study: http://www.indiana.edu/~atlantic/wp-cont...ntexts.pdf

These two studies provide evidence supporting the existence of white racism/ stereotypes.

Now let's deal with the other claim that I haven't provided any "logical, clear examples" which demonstrate that white stereotypes can cause harm.

Subsequent to providing the 2 studies above, I provided the following report which highlights my argument: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sou...e-28939089

Scroll down to the paragraph entitled "Racism fear"... You will read that council staff cited "fear of being labelled a racist" as the reason they didn't pursue reports of rape. This shows that it is conceivable that white stereotypes can lead to negative outcomes/ harm... How many girls might have been saved from rape over the course of 16 years in Rotherham if the council workers weren't afraid of being called a racist for pursuing reports against Asian men?

So it would seem I have actually provided examples demonstrating the existence and harm of white stereotypes. You would know that if you did what you have accused me of not doing - reading what the other person has written.

(10-11-2014 07:45 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Why do you assume the words attack is so harshly used that you mistitled the thread?
Do you remember when I wrote this?

Spade=spade Wrote:The title of the OP is (I have realised) somewhat badly worded... The word "attack" implies conscious intent. It makes for good click-bait but in truth I should re-word that as it doesn't accurately express my point. Racism against whiteness (like all other forms of racism) is very often unconscious. Hence its longevity. Culture simply frowns on certain forms of prejudice but not others. If we want a happier world, we should be constantly looking to tweak areas of societal life for the better. Amending our culture so that whiteness isn't constantly associated with racism might just be one such tweak we could make... So apologies for using the word "attack" in the title. I think it put certain posters on the wrong foot and this is my fault.

You know, because if something has been badly worded, it is the fault of the person who used the words... Look at the words in bold in the above paragraph. Do you see how they show that I took responsibility for wording things badly?? Feel free to pick up some tips here.

Juuuuuuust gonna throw that one out there!


(10-11-2014 07:45 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  How is someone like cjlr not wrong when claiming you interpenetrated him wrong but you aren't wrong in interpenetrating others wrong?
Hmmmmm - did you not see the part where I said I was wrong for using words that others might misinterpret?? Maybe you should read the above paragraph again... Whose fault is it if I have worded something badly?? Mine... The same principle applies to you and cjlr.

(10-11-2014 07:45 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  You make claims after claims... without rational, logical, or evaluated reasons to accept these claims you keep proposing. Idk.. is this an attack against you also? You seem fickle about that so I'm not sure if pointing out your misbehavior is an attack or not since I'm not sure how I've attacked you opposed to what you've said at me.

Actually, I have only really made 3 core claims as follows:

1) White stereotypes exist in our culture
2) They are overlooked relative to other stereotypes
3) They can conceivably lead to negative outcomes

Points 1 & 3 have been supported with evidence. Point 2 has simply been discussed.

But don't worry about the attacking thing anymore... I took the gloves off a while ago. This thread has descended into a playground spat and I just decided to roll with it. Smile

I'm not getting your level of comprehensions and ways of interpenetrating things.

You responding to things I'm not at all saying. I'm saying, you had no reason to adjust that you think your initial OP was full of "attacks" and poorly worded phrases. I'm saying you didn't need to do this, nor need to still. I think you put WAY too much attention into meticulous meaning within word choices that it doesn't appear others here are picking up on besides you.

(I think the point is misrepresented)

You've given links yes... but as other people have come and gone on this forum show. Just giving a link doesn't do much to support the claim alone. I've spared through those links and don't see much support for understated stereotypes nor that these are stereotype lead. These are the types of things I'm saying when I say you're arguments aren't being actually supported well enough in relation to the way they are made.

For instance, being feared for being labels a racist. Do you think this is a white stereotype issue? I don't know how this is a white stereotype issue from all contexts of people I've known and run into with regards of being or fearing being labeled racist.

I think you would do best in communication if you weren't so aggressive in interpreting tings in ways that you fit, and instead laid off to ask more questions about these positions from every angle.

"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
[+] 2 users Like ClydeLee's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: