According to recent polls, about half of all white Trump voters feel as though white people face a lot of discrimination.
If you're white, please feel free to offer up your tales of discrimination or what you see as white discrimination in society.
This is clearly an important topic that doesn't get a lot of attention in the media because the media is always focused on other types of discrimination.
Well, I own a restaurant and we have a few customers, not many, who we know that the white staff is not to wait on. Nothing they do is right, the tea isn't sweet enough, the coffee isn't hot enough, the prices are too high etc, etc, etc. They won't tip the white staff either. If we send a black waitress over everything is great and they get tipped well. We pretend that one of the black cooks is on duty so they won't complain about the food, also.
Geez, I thought that you lived in COLORADO, not Stone Mountain GA. If this kind of thing is going on in your establishment and these sorts of racial dynamics are the norm, it is no wonder you seem to have a burr in your saddle much of the time.
uh, it starts in grade school. whites discriminate against whites.
Whites discriminate against blacks and all cultures in between. Why do they do this? Its in their genetic codes, as they (we) were born with superiority complexes. They (whites) are taught to compete from the time they are in first grade. As a result whites also develop inferiority complexes when they perceive they are not the fittest white guy in the class. Maybe thats why when they (some) can bully other races, they do. I, in California have never bullied anyone (outside of my own family), but I did bully my own younger brothers when I was around ten just for the sheer sake of feeling my own power over them. (I, eventually learned not to do that. It hurt me to hurt them. To this day I regret it.)
Racism and discrimination is bullying, pure and simple and teachers are bullies with their control-freak ways. White bosses can also be discriminating against their white employees as well as anyone else.
If whites don't pretend to be the smartest and brightest, they will not be hired and when it is discoverd they are average Joes, they will soon be replaced.. They have to pretend. Its exhausting, believe me.
Just the number of times white people are called racist is evidence of racism.
I agree. I should be able to say whatever I want and not have to be discriminated against by being called a racist. It's called free speech for a reason.
Free speech means that you get to say it, not that no one can react negatively to it.
Whups! You get free speech but others don't?
* sitting in company "diversity and inclusion" seminars, all mandatory, including one called "what white men really think" taught by a black man without a hint of irony, though if someone had a white man teach a class of "what blacks really think", it would be condemned
* sitting in an implicit bias course at work where the female POC instructor talked about how all men are sexist, all whites are racist, all heterosexuals are biased against homosexuals and trans; I asked about the explicit bias in that statement, received a demerit with HR
* employer had a formal policy that they would promote women over men, all ethnicity over white, and that it was ethical to do so over recent white college grads to make up for generations of discrimination that ended before the current incoming new grads were born; AKA, we will discriminate against white men for collective sins, but give no collective credit for things like European whites ending slavery worldwide which was previously a universal institution
* racially disparate discipline in schools focused on equality of outcomes instead of equal treatment before the law/admin means black children are punished 1/3 of the time for offenses because on average the commit 3x as many offenses; end result, more violence, theft, assaults in schools by that group. Fatherlessness regardless of race is tied to bad behavior in school and criminal acts as adults; the issue is 3/4 of blacks are illegitimate versus 1/4 of whites ... calling it racism prevents actually correcting the bad kids and addressing the root cause, broken families.
* Seeing headlines where everything is blamed on my ethnic group. Lena Dunham's "straight white men need to go extinct" message is repeated in Buzzfeed's list of presentations that don't give a *(*#@. It is racist hatred, and while whites are told they have the power, only people in power can redefine words for atrocious acts to exclude themselves when they do it.
BLM activist advocates white genocide at Harvard
* Being told you can't talk about a topic because of your demographics. I live in a community with school taxes and hospital taxes going up 10% a year for years because 1/2 the births at the county hospital are to illegal immigrant mothers and their families don't pay enough in taxes to offset their costs on society as a whole. If a white tries to discuss this, prepare for name calling by the left, despite the demand that you pay the literal bill for it. And that's on top of ESL and services for migrants whether legal or illegal or "DACA" cases that arrived last summer suck funding from special education and gifted and talented programs.
Here I will respond to three of your comments.
1. * sitting in company "diversity and inclusion" seminars, all mandatory, including one called "what white men really think" taught by a black man without a hint of irony, though if someone had a white man teach a class of "what blacks really think", it would be condemned
That is an interesting point that clearly illustrates the myth of reverse racism. Thank you for posting. If someone were to teach a class "what the Indigenous really think", I would not be offended, as I am aware that many white Americans have a distorted view of Indigenous people, and have no idea what we think, nor do they care. And they are as equally disinterested in the perspective of the Black man. What is more offensive to many people of color are national holdidays such as Columbus Day, or Thanksgiving that celebrate murder and genocide. And the lame excuse that "We are simply giving thanks to God for all of our blessings" can't hold one single raindrop. Furthermore, people of color are forced to use money that bears the images of slaveowners and criminals. Indifferent white Americans don't have a problem with that. But it is a very big problem, as well as the statues and monuments across the country that glorify genocide and evil. Considering all of that, please do not be offended that I have no sympathy whatsoever for any white American who might be offended by a class entitled, "what white men really think". If my sensibilities were that frail I would have cashed in my chips many years ago.
2. * sitting in an implicit bias course at work where the female POC inst.ructor talked about how all men are sexist, all whites are racist, all heterosexuals are biased against homosexuals and trans; I asked about the explicit bias in that statement, received a demerit with HR
I am a man, and before that I was a little boy. First of all I beleive you are exaggerating in order to promote your narrative. It is absurd to suggest that any sex or race is so monolithic that we can proclaim all of these think like this, and all of those think like that. This part of your comment would have been more believable if you had said the instructor suggested that "many men" were sexist, or even a majority. Along with being a man I served 6 years in the U.S. Navy. It is no secret that Navy towns like San Diego have always profited from a lucrative sex industry. Prostitution and Pornography were big money makers when I was stationed in San Diego, and I am sure they still are. Men primarily see women serving in two roles:
• as objects of sexual gratification
• as live-in nannies to care for their children
Otherwise, many men have little respect for women. For instance, I remember having a conversation with two older white American men in their 70's at a Tiki Bar where I was doing a show. We were talking about oral sex. I was shocked when one of the men told us how is dearly departed wife had given him so much oral pleasure during their 30+ years of marriage! Of course he did not say it in such a nice manner, but in a vulgar way, as if she were a 20 dollar hooker he had picked up on his way home from work. This is how he spoke to me,(a stranger) and his best friend. This is how he spoke of the woman he claimed to have loved. I felt sorry for the woman, and I was glad that she was free from such an evil and vulgar man. This is a perfect example of why I had many teenage girl friends in high school. Once the word got around that I did not kiss and tell, I soon became very popular, and it was truly a blessing. Yes, I have always been driven by my libido, just like any normal man, but there is no disrespect in performing a natural function. However, there is a great disrespect in publicly revealing the intimate details of a relationship. But this is just one slice of my life. And I have witnessed women being disrespected by men in various ways throughout my life.
I don't have time to challenge all of your comments and so I will end my scathing denouncement of your commentary by exposing the obvious fraud of comment number 3.
3.* employer had a formal policy that they would promote women over men, all ethnicity over white, and that it was ethical to do so over recent white college grads to make up for generations of discrimination that ended before the current incoming new grads were born; AKA, we will discriminate against white men for collective sins, but give no collective credit for things like European whites ending slavery worldwide which was previously a universal institution
It is quite ethical to promote women over men, or other races over whites here in the United States. In fact this needs to be done to a greater degree. The white man in America had over a 400 year head start. And you call it discrimination, but I am more human than human, and so I call it justice, I call it payback, and I call it Karma. The argument about the poor white people being forced to pay for the collective sins of those who preceded them, is at best a lame argument. It is a lame argument because for over 500 years here in America white people have been the beneficiaries of genocide, the theft of an entire continent, and the enslavement of the Indigenous and the African. And your comment about European whites ending the institution of slavery worldwide deserves a place in the Hubpage Forums Hall of Fame! Considering that white Europeans were responsible for the proliferation of slavery, beginning in the 15th century, whatever they may have done to end slavery cannot be seen as an entirely magnanimous gesture. And if what you are saying is true, then we need to recognize the self-serving aspect of what you have claimed. And here is how it goes:
"Oh my! I have committed a great wrong against people of color throughout the world. Now, because I have committed these great sins and defiled the image of God, I will right the many wrongs I have committed. I will go to and fro about the Earth and put an end to the institution of slavery."
This is the facade that is presented to the world. But beneath that wonderful image is the self-serving fact that once a nation has gained supremacy as the result of a 400 year system of Chattel Slavery, it is simply pragmatic to blow up the bridge that took you to the other side, and which enabled you to ascend to the top of the mountain. In this way, no other nation could repeat your formula for success. Thus, white supremacy and the supremacy of the United States is maintained.
I am only half white, and I am here to tell the world that even I have enjoyed an advantage over my Full Blood brothers, as well as the Black Man. I know that white privilege exists simply because even though I have been victimized by racial discrimination, I have also enjoyed a certain degree of white privilege because of my duality. This I cannot deny, because it is only the truth. Because my physical features have been influenced by the European blood, I have always been more accepted by whites than a Full Blood, or a Black Man. Because of this acceptance, more doors have been opened for me. Just as the white man is bound, because there is a little white man living inside of me, I am also bound to denounce this evil. I am bound to help destroy that which has made my life easier, and better, at the expense of the African and the Indigenous.
It is right that the Full Blood and the Black Man should stand in line ahead of me. And this is not because they are weak or unable to rise up on their own. But it is because I am strong enough to suffer the humility of accepting responsibility for this great evil. Recently the son of a great American General, along with other veterans, got down on his knees at Standing Rock and asked the Lakota, and all Indigenous people for their forgiveness. Wesley Clarke Jr. appears to be a very wise man. He has set an example that white America is bound to follow. Only such humility and respect can heal these wounds. Denial can only lead us to oblivion.
"It is quite ethical to promote women over men, or other races over whites here in the United States."
It's always ethical to promote your own race or sex over others, isn't it? That it gives rise to racism and even slavery is irrelevant, as long is your own race isn't the victim, right?
"I call it justice, I call it payback, and I call it Karma."
Most people do not take out "justice", or "payback" on those that had zero to do with what happened. Even the concept of Karma does not contain that obnoxious attitude, whether such evil is intentional or not. Only a true racist would find such a vile concept (taking revenge on a third party innocent of having anything to do with an event) simply because of the color of their skin. It is exactly the viewpoint that brought about slavery and the depredations against American Indians - that skin color should determine how a person should be treated. Congratulations.
As I have clearly explained in the past. You have not educated yourself in these matters , and so I cannot account for your lack of understanding. You suggest that my comment is offensive, yet you see no racism or offense in generation after generation of white Americans enjoying the benefits provided by the criminals that preceded them. It is even written into U.S. Law that knowingly receiving stolen property is a crime; especially when a murder was committed during the theft. When we include 400 years of slavery and human trafficking, it is a most egregious offense indeed! A man is not innocent when he participates and enjoys the benefit of a criminal enterprise, especially when he is fully aware of the crimes that have been committed. I have insured that you have been made aware . Now you are bound by the Law of Gravity. Physician ... heal thyself !!!
No, it's not the skin color that necessarily determines who is liable for reparations. It is better determined by those who have prospered from the misery of others. Here in the United States that just happens to be those who are of white Euro-American descent. That's not racism. That is simply a fact. Furthermore, you commented:
" Most people do not take out "justice", or "payback" on those that had zero to do with what happened."
To refresh your memory, "most people" and in this context I mean "most white people", either looked the other way or participated in the slave trade for nearly 400 years. That is what "most people" did. Now, what "most people" do, is to enjoy the fruits of an evil legacy. I've got your "most people". Be sure and tell all your friends that we are about to "Make America great Again!"
I stand by what I said. Your post was disgusting, offensive and as racist as anything I've seen on HP forums.
It's tone is typical of the things he posts here wilderness.
Tamara, you are so brave for posting your stories of discrimination against white people that happens on a daily basis and makes our lives unnecessarily complicated and problematic. Like me, you read about these things in publications like the NY Post and Breitbart, media that really tells it like it is. I'm sure you'd like my new favorite publication, The Daily Stormer, too. It prints good, factual stories about injustices done to white people in this country.
Breitbart? I was almost taking you serious and informed independent thinker. What other, credible references can you offer?
Report buried Trump-related ‘hate crimes’ against white kids
http://nypost.com/2016/12/05/report-bur … hite-kids/
Do you recognize the immorality of asking for personal stories of discrimination and then calling everyone who shares such stories a bigot? The immediate attacks on whites who report discrimination is proof of the bias you ostensibly asking about.
No, I have never been discriminated against because I am white.
Personally, I was discriminated against in that I needed financial aid due to poverty but had to rely on student loans alone for most of my educational funding because almost all the scholarships go to minorities, and have a minority group named in the title. Unless you're a brilliant engineering major with a perfect SAT score and experience ending world hunger and curing cancer in high school, all the scholarships are for minorities of some kind. One that I thought was for all women turned out to be just for single mothers.
I know they think they're doing good, but it's true that if they had a whites-only scholarship, people would pitch a fit. Yet black-only, Mexican only, Native American only, etc. scholarships are fine? Seems like cognitive dissonance to me, attempting to fight past discrimination with future discrimination.
Other than that, I can't think of an instance of "discrimination" but blacks and other minority groups I would argue rarely get discriminated against in the U.S. in this day and age either. They just hold onto a grudge against whites, ALL whites, even if our direct ancestors got their limbs shot off to end slavery, because of various injustices that happened to blacks (and other minority groups like Native Americans) in the P-A-S-T. They're clinging to the past and using it as an excuse to be bigoted against all white people, and I don't think that's fair. I've dealt with abuse and bigotry just for being white from blacks growing up a lot. I grew up in a "ghetto" neighborhood and went to a school once (one out of many elementary schools I went to cause we moved around a lot due to poverty as a kid) where I was one of very few whites. As such, I stuck out like a sore thumb, making me a target for bullying. At another school (where whites were the majority) most of the worst bullying I got was from black kids and not one black kid ever stood up for me against another, because they have a racial-collectivist mindset really, they stand up for each other and see whites as enemies and outsiders. I had a black girl kick me when I was trying to skate at the roller rink. I had a black girl beat me up on the bus. I had a black boy who rubbed dog shit on my backpack. A black girl kicked me in the shins and called me "bitch!" in choir when she was standing behind me. None of it was provoked. They just hate white people. They always picked on whatever white kid they saw as smaller and weaker or who had glasses or was shy and insecure. It's hard not to be prejudiced against black people after that experience.
The only reason I'm not is because I have had black friends before (although not any BFF kind of lasting friendships, nothing very close, and I think that is because they see us as outsiders), I have met decent black people (although like I said, they will never get involved against a fellow black person who is bullying a non-black person, even if they're friends with that non-black person) and some of the bullies against me were also white. But, it is hard to endure such nasty, unprovoked torment and hatred without a few scars.
I know GOOD AND WELL what you mean! I had the same experience - and I'm black. I didn't necessarily grow up poor, either. Let's face it - there's a basis for 13% of the population (blacks) being responsible for 50% of violent crimes in this country. That is because an inordinate amount of black children are bullies.
@Say Yes to Life
Too bad what you went through in school. And not 50%, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, non-Hispanic blacks accounted for 39.4% of the prison and jail population in 2009, while non-Hispanic whites were 34.2%, and Hispanics (of any race) 20.6%. It does pay to get you facts straight.
Black children are not bullies, again, sorry for what you experienced as a child.
Again, your facts are wanting! Asian American teens are bullied more than youths belonging to any other racial group, according to new data from the U.S. Justice and Education departments:
Asian American teens are bullied 'more than youths belonging to any other racial group.' It is Blacks who bully other Blacks in American schools. In mixed schools, Blacks and whites pick on Asians. White children do not pick on Black.
Your argument supporting White discrimination is (mostly) unfounded and off topic.
Sorry, I missed a statistic:
Whites were responsible for 9,390,473 murders in the U.S., compared to 6,502,919 Blacks; and 274,487 other races. See (https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/20 … verviewpdf)
"In mixed schools, Blacks and whites pick on Asians." The public junior high school I attended had this problem. One Asian 9th grader was tormented to the point where he used a butter knife to kill a black girl. He was standing in the lunch line, and the girl cut in front of him. He said nothing, but she really wanted a fight, so she taunted and shoved him. He finally lost control.
Asians traditionally are hardworking, polite and reserved. I suppose that could be why they suffer the most harassment. But that's NO excuse! Knowing the climate at that school, that boy did the world a favor!
His parents sent him to Hong Kong to live with relatives. Good - he shouldn't have to throw his life away because he got rid of a little scum!
P.S. What about the US cities having the most violent crime being dominated by a black population?
http://downtrend.com/vsaxena/most-viole … opulations
How liberal discipline policies are making schools less safe
http://nypost.com/2015/03/14/politician … -everyone/
Obama Administration’s ‘Race-Based’ Discipline Policies Increase School Violence
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government … -violence/
Basically, poor whites tend to be more likely to be racist because they're dealing with blacks and other groups who hate on them for being white more often. If you go through life not experiencing anti-white bigotry, it's probably because you're so damn privileged you don't live around any minorities other than quiet Asians and genius Indians who are too busy working hard to be successful to stomp around yelling about how the white man is keeping them down.
There is a lot to be said for it being class-ism vs racism. Poor whites, poor blacks, poor hispanics have all essentially abandoned marriage due to welfare programs that penalize it, so poor whites and poor blacks BOTH have 70%+ illegitimacy rates. The difference is that for blacks, that is the majority of births.
If you're middle class and married, your kid has 10% odds of screwing up like addiction, jail. Unmarried single mother of any race's child - 30%. The thing we blame is racism when the problem is destruction of the family among those who can least afford it.
@Tamara, the real crux of the issue is socioeconomic class, not so much racism. A Black child born into upper socioeconomic circumstances have avenues & networks to educational opportunities that a Caucasian child born into lower socioeconomic circumstances..........SIMPLY DON'T. The issue isn't race at all but MONEY. MONEY is the great equalizer in our society.
For example, when I was high school, many poor Caucasian students worked after school for money. I as a middle income Black didn't have to do so. My high school which was a private school was adjacent to Hell's Kitchen(now Clinton). Hell's Kitchen was then known as a neighborhood of lower middle, working, & lower class Caucasians. Some of the students who attended my high school came from Hell's Kitchen. Many were poor.
@gmwilliams. There are several approaches to understand/analize racism in America. One, of course, is what you just described. In what class you are born definitely affects your ability to succeed, regardless of race. As you say, a black child born to rich parents has many more opportunities open to them when compared to a white child born to poor parents.
But the other comparison is this - a white child born to rich parents has a decidedly easier chance to succeed than a black child born in the same wealth.
The lower you go on the socioeconomic scale, the fewer doors are open to blacks and Hispanics than their white counterparts. That is the way it was America prior to 1964 when the oppression was overt. Since then it still exists, maybe somewhat less frequently, but it is hidden by code words and PC talk.
A married black couple is in poverty 9% of the time, a white single mother has a 22% poverty rate. We have a marriage gap that is tied to class because of welfare programs. The good news is, we can solve the now inter-generational lock in of the poor that were previously rising up to the middle class by rebuilding the families in those communities. The bad news is, that isn't something fixed by a single program or even really by the government except removing the penalties that discourage marriage among the poor.
I grew up poor, and didn't get college scholarships except a few academic and girls in STEM modest grants because I'm white. The class bias in college admissions and scholarships was obvious when I was often the only white person in the interviewing room, and my relative lack of extra-curricular activities was held against men when I was working 20 hours a week in high school to pay the family's bills. I worked through college, too, which hurt my grades but was necessary to pay my living expenses. Others went on spring break trips - I worked 80 hours to save money to pay for books and summer classes.
I graduated with a bachelor's in engineering and no debt. It was despite the biases that favor middle class and upper class POC and immigrants over native born whites. They are also biased against poor POC who don't fit liberal narratives - someone wrote how committees give everything to the Mexican kid who says they want to be an immigrant advocate but ignore the "I just want a middle class job", support the black kid who wants to do ethnic studies over the one aspiring to be an investment banker/economist.
Another issue is one William Shetterley writes about. By censoring word choice in the name of various victim groups, the elites feel they are doing something when it does nothing to actually help those groups. It is in my opinion the elevation of Sapir-Whorf theory that words shape thoughts, so if you micromanage language, you somehow remake thoughts and society. In reality, it just offends a lot of people, enables bullying by the left in the name of various causes, sometimes generates anger that reinforces what they want to end and immorally labels many good people as bad for not meeting strict but ever changing ideological guidelines.
If you ban X, Y and Z terms that have negative associations and vague associations with blacks, that doesn't really help poor blacks get jobs, married, stable home lives. If you police your peers' language, it doesn't help immigrants learn English, solve labor oversupply that depresses wages, teach the poor less self destructive habits. But it gives the moral arbiters of society great social power and lets them think they ARE doing good. That it helps no one but the social justice warriors and creates many new abused victims while ignoring many of the poor in society is irrelevant when the definition of morality for the left is "does it make me feel good, do I have good intentions, the outcomes are irrelevant".
"A married black couple is in poverty 9% of the time, a white single mother has a 22% poverty rate." The poverty rate for whites overall is 9%, and for blacks, just under 28%. It sounds like the real solution is for people to choose a moral lifestyle.
@Say Yes To Life
Careful with that 'moral lifestyle' stuff as a solution! Advocating 'Moral Behavior' is what Christ, Jesus crucified. People naturally life destructive lifestyles, before and especially after retirement, and especially Whites, believe it or not.
Black Folks die from poor eating habits, old age, and exposure to various diseases. White Folks, on the other hand, die (mostly) from bad attitudes. They are (unfortunately) the biggest suckers corporate America and the Government have.
And the Government's favorite ruse is buttering White Folks up with life insurance policies, which they eagerly buy into under the guise of 'family protection' after the death of the insured. They are told they were the pillars of the communities, and White Folks proudly show off their gold retirement watches as proof of esteem. Then just before they are diagnosed with cancer or heart disease they realize that they were nothing but supporters of the Government, not pillars of the community. Then the anger starts to wail because after they realize they've been taken. Hence, old White Republicans.
I do not infer, herein, that Whites are 'suckers' in a negative sense, rather I infer they indeed are victims, but victim of the same Government they hold dear, their very own!
" 'Moral Behavior' is what Christ, Jesus crucified.". I don't understand what you mean by that. Christ Jesus promoted a moral lifestyle, as did other great religious leaders such as Confucius and Gautama Buddha. They all understood the laws of Cause and Effect. Living a moral lifestyle and taking good care of your family, proving for them after you die, leads to a satisfying life for you and your descendents. If everyone did that, you would have an ideal society. Places where people sneer at the concept tend to be chaotic with high crime rates, like GHETTOS.
Use of "social justice warriors" as a pejorative.
The apparent belief that "the left" is a homogenous lump of people with exactly the same thoughts, feelings, and motivations.
The apparent (and clairvoyant) knowledge of the motivations of every person who's political ideology sits on the left of the political spectrum.
Claims about the impact of programs/ policies/ approaches without any evidence other than anecdotes.
In my opinion the above assumptions/ biases are barriers to constructively engaging with people who don't already share your worldview.
The claim "don't lump all people together" by the left falls apart when you realize they call all Trump supporters racist (as I've been insulted as by several in this forum), calling all Christians bigots, all men sexist, etc.
The left engages in blanket smears and collective assignment of guilt - but it is OK for them in their minds because they've labeled themselves smart, good, moral, tolerant - and then denigrate all who disagree as stupid, evil, crazy, at best uneducated on the assumption that all good people will agree with them.
I recognize that classic liberals are separate from the authoritarian liberals, though the classic liberals barring a few like Stephan Molynaux and Sargon of Akkad are not condemning the totalitarian leanings of the authoritarian leftists, the SJWs.
Thus the classic liberals have trouble telling BLM, no, we won't segregate by race for your supposed comfort, no, we won't assign collective guilt on all whites and demonize them in mandatory job seminars and classroom environments, that's racist - no matter what race is calling for the degradation and institutional discrimination.
And I DID give data to explain how much we blame on racism is due to lack of marriage/stable families.
"They do it too" is a poor argument, and no justification for doing what you criticize others for. "The left engages in blanket smears and collective assignment of guilt" is itself a blanket-smear and assignment of collective guilt which, by your own standard, is deserving of criticism. That's self-defeating. It's the equivalent of criticizing someone for swearing, by swearing at them.
"Authoritarian liberals" is a contradiction in terms. An authoritarian, by definition, isn't liberal and vice-versa, unless you change the definition of "authoritarian" or "liberal". If you want to criticize people for using authoritarian methods to achieve liberal goals, then fine, but the term "authoritarian liberals" is literally nonsensical.
"Classical liberalism" is a political ideology, not an identity. There is no tribe called "classical liberals". There are just people who subscribe to that political ideology to varying degrees, including not at all. If not, then how many classical liberalism ideas does someone need to agree with to be considered a "classical liberal"? And if someone leans towards conservatism, but maintains values considered classically liberal, e.g. the principle of civil liberties, are they a "classical liberal"? How many drops of classical liberalism does someone need to be classified a classical liberal?
Therein lies the problem with the type of tribalism you're engaging in. It creates artificial (and ultimately meaningless) divisions, which only serve as a distraction. If that's your aim, then why? If it's not, then why are you engaging in a way that perpetuates such divisions?
What Discrimination Have You Faced as a White Person?
First things first, this thread did not invite comments from non-White people into the discussion, so I hope I am not intruding as an uninvited commentator.
There have NOT been must Studies in the way of ‘White discrimination' in America unless European Jews are considered White too. I as one agree that social science could benefit from more in-depth research in this area.
!Now close your mouths, Black Folks, and listen up, you too White Folks, because I intend to offer some ‘straight talk’ here!
I am not White, as an African American, I can only imagine the experience of White discrimination in America because I do not know what it is to be White, even though it is White Folks who are the dominate group America. I am sure, however, that there is much validity to claims of White people being discriminated against because they are White.
Now, the reason I suggest additional research in the area of White discrimination is that, thus far, there is no such thing [as] defined in any scholarly journals of the social sciences. “Reverse Discrimination” is too broad and general in nature to give particular attention to White Discrimination.
“So, what in the ‘hell’ is it, You May Ask Yourself?
Is it because Whites are rejected for Jobs when they have the same education and skillset as non-Whites?
Is it because Whites have to pay more taxes when they earn less?
Is it because White Folks have less representation in government, and policies target Whites while favoring other groups?
Or, is it because White privilege is being taken away slowly, that White Americans, as the ruling dominate group of America should be favored over all other groups:?
Employment: Dr. Fred L. Pincus, (2004) in an American Sociological Association article entitled “Reverse Discrimination: Dismantling the Myth” reasons that reverse discrimination has been taken for granted in the halls of academia and is one the most serious problems facing White men.
Dr. Pincus’s research study found that women and people of color were the actual (true) victims of discrimination. Is that all, You May Ask Yourself? No, it is not all. In dissecting Affirmation Action policies, Pincus found that the fact that Asians, aged 25 or "older ... had the highest level of educational attainment nationally [make that group more qualified for jobs in America more than any other groups]. His findings [also] reveal, among other things, that the respondents, who had all self-identified as reverse discrimination "victims" tended to have "more . . . Complaints of race [than sex] discrimination . . . [and a greater number regarding] promotion and firing. .Than ... hiring and quotas.” (http://www.jstor.org/stable/3593758).
Academic review(s) of this study show that “[Rhetoric] supporting the status quo [was] examined, and the authors [of reverse discrimination] ask who is benefiting from existing social arrangements. Through vignettes and case studies, readers are shown how beneficial it is for those in power to keep the masses fighting among themselves. A good strategy if I say so myself, it is working well!
Government representation: Do White people vote for who they think will be best for the country, or just best for them? I rest my case on that question.
First I'll answer the question "Do white people vote for who they think will be best for the country or just best for them. I"m white and I voted for Obama, so I rest my case.
Because I live in the north, I haven't been discriminated against often. I have two occasions where black women stuck their noses so high in the air that they would have drowned if it had been raining. One was working in a fast food line and the other in a grocery store. I've never been that way myself, so I don't know what their problem was.
Please, Barbara, understand, of course, you don't you do not have to, that many times it takes just a White face to intimidate a non-White. Working in the fast food industry or a grocery store 'can pay the bills' to a point of pride, especially if there is no money left over. They may have learned to live with, accept and celebrate their fate of just barely making ends meet.
then there is simply the issue of Women being vain, I'm prettier than she is, I'm skinnier than her, etc. Sounds to me like, there was no (serious) problem. And you would probably be an interesting research subject - learning to define - in White discrimination. Indeed, many White Americans voted for out-going President Obama but not nearly enough data analysis and survey studies have done to understand such social psychological motives. Yes, I think it is important if for nothing the inductive or deductive reasoning.
I am not white but I would like to make a comment. Everyone is discriminated against in their life due to differences in our appearances but the reason why black people talk about it a lot because it happens to us a lot. White people get upset if someone suggest the notion that Jesus is black, Adam and Eve are black, God is black, Angels are black, hell even if I were to say Santa is Black. They cannot fathom the thought. We have been made to feel that because we are black we should not exist, we are ugly, we are animals. All races has good and bad but if my skin is black immediately I am feared. If I am a unarmed black male I get killed because I am threatening. I am immediately a criminal because of the color of my skin, stereotypes, TV, and fake statistics. I do not get the privilege to live like white criminals. My babies, my brothers, my mothers, my sisters lives are threaten by the color of their skin. We are considered lower than dirt but all life came from us; black people give birth to white babies all the time but white people cannot give birth to black babies. Most black people are loving towards all races because we are not taught to hate based on color but on character. If a black person is being mean to a white person its because of how we've been treated. We should not have to sit back and say its okay for you to call me a soulless savage and treat me as such for generations and think my children won't remember. Its okay for you to manipulate minds to hate us because of our color and even manipulate the minds of black people to hate themselves to where they bleach their skin then you make fun of them for bleaching their skin after you told them from birth their dark skin is evil, their dark skin is ugly. I mean seriously what do you think that type of brainwashing does to a person?
Point taken, Raine Sky, but everything you just pointed out is part of the problem with us, Black Folks. We cannot and should not White Folks blame our problems of dissatisfaction with our skin, questions of our faith or our young Black men gunned down by police, etc.
On the other hand, if White Folks have a problem with the color our skin, or if White Folks have a problem with our faith, etc., then they have a lot of problems too.
Of the many problems in the world we live in is that we fail in our effort(s) to clear out the weeds before we plant the seeds. for only then will the real problems present themselves. We may find a solution or a solution beyond our control (of Biblical proportions), we have all (White Folks too) either fallen sick because of the disease or we are the disease, is a question You May Ask Yourself.
I have never felt disadvantaged or discriminated against because I'm white.
Not even once, not even a little bit.
Never went searching for a college grant and found dozens for black people, or hispanics or women but not a single one dedicated to whites?
Never felt that a job search was being hindered because companies had to hire blacks, or some race or sex not yours?
But you probably saw some from certain schools, fraternal orders, and for old boys--all institutions that historically excluded people of color and so are essentially whites-only.
Try talking to minorities and you will hear stories of real discrimination. Being white is still a huge advantage, even if it is occasionally dinged that is like complaining about someone once keying you Bentley as if it is a hardship equivalent to living a in a cardboard box.
There certainly seems to be cultural discrimination against whites. Take the new Star Wars movie, Rogue One. Many white people are complaining that they've changed the whole universe into a multi-cultural feel good universe. The store was originally about one white guy who saved the universe. Now, to appease political correctness, the movies have female heroes and a multi-cultural cast to give the impression that everybody participates.
So it is cultural discrimination to not have a privately-made for-profit movie have an all white cast.
I don't think that word means what you think it means.
If they want to make a different sci-fi movie about a multicultural universe, then go ahead. I'll probably go see it too. However, to change an existing universe and suddenly populate it with people who weren't there before is just pure political correctness.
Who says they weren't there before? The creator of the work decided they were.
I agree that Rogue One is too blatant in its efforts to include non-white faces. Story-wise, it just feels very illogical that none of these faces were glimpsed in the previous trilogies.
But this as evidence of discrimination? That's a really far stretch of imagination, even by galactic standards.
In case you didn't notice, Sychophantastic, YOU (and me), as a white person, are the MINORITY world-wide. By your logic, all movies should only have Asian people in them since they, as a race, are by far the largest of them all. LOL. Your funny.
Well I think with entertainment, it's ok for it to reflect the demographics of the target audience. They're a global minority, but a majority in America where the movie is made. The audience the thing is made for determines the race of the characters. Nothing is wrong with that.
So what if they have a handful of scholarships/bursaries set aside for First Nations? They had 50 other ones I could apply for. This is not a great hardship. Plus, if I was going to consider that discrimination I'd have to say I was being discrimated against for being married (because they had bursaries for single parents), not being on a sports team (because they had bursaries for athletes), not majoring in business (because they had bursaries for business majors), and being healthy/able-bodied (because they had bursaries for sick and disabled students). Seems like a lot of stuff to feel slighted by when I could just find another one that applied to me.
" This is not a great hardship. " Maybe to you, but that's beside the point. It's about principles. If you believe discrimination is wrong, it should be wrong in principle whether it be a black-only scholarship, Chinese-only scholarship, Native American-only scholarship, or a white-only scholarship. I believe that all discrimination on the basis of race or gender is wrong because schools should look only at the student's talent, abilities, ethics, and academic and professional record when making decisions.
A person's race is not relevant to how well they will perform in college or in the job market. A college shouldn't be trying to give some people some kind of undeserved artificial leg up, it should just select the best candidates for the scholarship or admission.
I can only speak for where I live, but my country's worst kept secret (for those of us willing to see it) is that First Nations are treated terribly, and are disadvantaged in just about every way.
As a white person, the hardship I experience by not being able to apply for maybe 5% of total bursaries offered because I'm not a First Nations member doesn't hold a candle to the hardships that they experience every day in every area of their lives. So no, I'm not gonna sit here and be upset about discrimination because not everything under the sun is for my taking as a white person. And no, I don't think it's so bad to offer a group of people who notoriously suffer from unemployment and a lack of education an extra hand to get out of that cycle.
Being white is NOT an advantage. Believing yourself a "minority" and buying into the false narrative is a disadvantage.
Are you a minority? (No idea why you put it quotation marks as though being a minority is not a real thing.)
No I am not a "minority". No, I am not "white". I am not that easily manipulated.
As 99% of Americans are a mix of races, "minority" would seem to be a term almost without meaning - pick whatever race you like and you likely have some genes from it. Call yourself whatever you wish, and it probably has some truth in it.
Of course "male" really IS a minority as there are more females than males...
Okay, then a visible minority as that tends to be where judgment comes from.
Well the realities some people are living contradict what you would like to believe. If you are a visible minority it doesn't matter what you buy into or not, you are affected by discrimination.
Only if you buy into the ignorance you are trying to sell. You are the real problem.
Your profound perception and argument are intimidating to people who do not possess the capacity or refuse to understand a sound reason when they hear it. All they see is the focus of their problem before them, but when they trip, they complain that someone placed an obstacle in their way.
Soldier on as you will get through to some.
"historically" is the key word there, no fraternity or sorority is allowed to discriminate against non-whites currently, but plenty of them discriminate against anyone outside the racial group they're founded to cater to. Discrimination is supposedly illegal for any racial group, but it's apparently ok if minority groups discriminate against whites and non-members of their race forming clubs just for blacks or just for Asians on campus and so on.
12 per cent of the US population is black. 12 percent, lol. And you reckon they are persecuting you?
Get some focus.
But you're Canadian, I have had less problems in Canada, as well. While there are always issues, the society appeared to be more evolved in race relations relative to the U.S. I have crossed over 7 Canadian provinces, paying close attention to these kinds of things and that is the impression that I had taken back with me on my return.
You might find this article interesting.
http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/out- … of-mind-2/
It is curious how one minority assumes everything is ok in a society as long as that minority is not the one suffering. Sometimes, I think America seems worse because we are so open about our lives, our society, etc. We do not hesitate to point out problems we find and we do not think it is somehow 'unamerican' to be honest about perceived problems in our past and present. But, it is our openness and honesty which gives us the hope that we can solve whatever problems we come across. We don't allow each other to hide anything.
@Live to Learn
Ah, another Functionalist argument, Crisis Theory would agree with the 'real' of your explanatory description of issues in America, but would unequivocally challenge your conclusive resolve, if there is one.
Your curiosity of 'one' minority claiming all is well in America is a myth; i.e., Timothy Caine and Dr. Ben Carson, opportunists-at-large is an example of many minorities who say everything is okay. But not in a sane conscientious reflection of even their personal Black experiences.
Hiding things is legally reserved for the State Department, FBI, the age of a woman and what is in her purse; people who are part of any society, even the ancients, seek to discover secrets of its citizens because if it is hidden to must not be good, be it a relationship, prejudices or health. Sure, one would say "it is none of your business" but if you are a parent, scientist, or an election committee you would probably disagree.
Finally, I am somewhat familiar with Terry Glavin, and his article "Canada’s race problem? It’s even worse than America’s." Love this guy, he is a provocative instigator whose rhetorical offerings wake people up to start thinking outside the box.
Then you must have an opinion as to why Whites feel discriminated against, or marginalized. And for a White female who feels as you do, your opinion may have great merit!
Just that I am rich, most everywhere in predominant nonwhite countries. Or there is a local price and a tourist price, a higher price.
Bill Cosby did not allow whites on his sets during filming of the Cosby show. BB King did not like whites hanging around him back stage during performances. Blacks probably discriminate blacks as well. Its a human nature issue. We all do it (bully and discriminate) until we realize harmony and kindness is better than competition and power.
Another example of discrimination against whites is the black Santa in Mall of America. This idea that we need to appease groups of people by corrupting our symbols and changing them so that groups can identify with them is ridiculous. Black Santa? Next thing you know people will be making black Jesus.
I'm not being sarcastic. People are really upset about black Santa.
Just as they lose their minds over even the possibility of the black James Bond, Black casting of superheroes etc. James Bond has been 45 years old for 50 years and changed appearance and nationality more often the Dr. Who, but somehow being black is just crazy talk.
Those people have way too much time on theirhands. Who cares what color Santa is? As for your comment about Jesus, he wasn't a white guy either and I've never heard any complaints when he is shown as blue eyed and blond haired.
What do you mean Jesus wasn't white? Every Jesus I have ever seen is white. He's white.
Blue eyed too. And he spoke perfect American English.
Jesus was the son of a Jew. He would have had dark hair, dark eyes and was probably olive skinned or darker. Not black though. There is one point in the New Testament where they identify a guy as black so it probably would have been pointed out had Jesus been black too.
Well, there's absolutely zero proof that Jesus wasn't white. I'm sure most people believe that he was white or if you did a poll, people would say he's white, so I'm going to continue to believe that he was white.
Prior to all this political correctness, nobody said that Jesus wasn't white.
Uhhh... the debate over Jesus' race has been going on for centuries.
How lucky we all are to finally speak to someone who knew Jesus personally and can verify facts for us!
How tall was he? Was he handsome? Was his voice soft and kind or deep and commanding?
I beg to differ with you. Jesus of Nazareth was a Jew with olive-skin that would have been darkened by the sun because He walked everywhere He went. He lived in the land of Israel in the Middle East. All of the religions mentioned in the Bible began in the Middle East, primarily as a way to control the masses.
After Jesus entered into His ministry and was filled with the Holy Spirit, His face shined with the glory of God. He was filled with Light. So! I can imagine he looked white. People have visions, spiritual encounters and some people experience death and return to life having seen Jesus, they say. Its funny how so many depicted him with fair skin, long before we had great technology to communicate, like the internet. And, still do!
The tan, yes, but the olive skin? Without a father, how can we insist that the genetics of the woman nurturing the fetus and giving birth played any part whatsoever?
As far as light - ever seen a red light bulb? Or green or a UV bulb? Maybe Jesus shone with gamma rays rather than light our eyes can detect.
Olive skin can be fair to dark, its a natural green pigment. Women who are into knowing what colors of clothing looks best on them deepening on what season of colors their pigments are have been "color coded". Or, they are naturals at it.
I can put on a black top and I look grey, but if I put on a necklace with my jewel colors, I brighten right up. Different shades of spring and summer colors look best on me. What colors look best on you?
You are assuming the olive skin of Mary was transmitted to Jesus, yes? What makes you think her genetics had anything at all to do with it - certainly Joseph's didn't!
I would not say that I am assuming. I would say that my imagination creates mental images, especially of Jesus being full of Light.
Genetics played an important roll chronologically in the Bible. Who beget who, who beget who... so, I naturally believe genetics played a roll with Jesus as the son of Mary, the son of man, and the Son of God.
Added: The Bible constructs the time line.
When we realize we don't know something it should inspire the 'question mark', if we have our imagination and creativity left in tact.
I'm pretty sure most people aren't that dumb.
The Jesus everyone sees on the catholic pictures is the picture of a Roman Prince. There are no pictures of Jesus. The people in the land Mary was born in were of color and African descent. So most likely so was Mary. God made man in his image. First known people are African. So why is it so far fetched to say God is black? Jesus is black. Why does that hurt your heart so? Why does it make white people angry that you could be serving a black God?
Is it because you have been taught for so long that black people are yuck and inferior and you are brilliant and superior?
I think the real deal is someone is being facetious, using sarcasm, to illustrate or show a group of people in a less than favorable light. The problem is that it is not a group of people but their stereotype of that group of people, so it misses the mark. Meanwhile, the group that someone probably shares a worldview with is completely oblivious to what that goal is and what is going on. The premises seem loaded but in a karmic way it has become a self inflicted tragedy of sorts.
Jesus was a man of the Middle East. Very dark eyes and hair. He did not have blue eyes and brown hair.
"Every Jesus I have ever seen is white. He's white."
When and where did you ever see Jesus? Or do you refer to statues and paintings, produced by someone that also never saw Him and has zero clue what He looked like?
(Won't go into the likely appearance of an entity from another universe, with physical laws different than ours and is not made of the same matter that we are. Jesus might be ultraviolet in color, or gamma rays!)
You just made my point. Nobody has seen him and nobody knows what he looks like. So I will choose to believe that he's white based on every representation I have ever seen. I will also continue to believe that climate change is a hoax because when I look outside right now, it's 9 degrees and freezing cold. I wish there were climate change!
Um, he was the same color as everyone else in his ethic group living in that area at that time, brown. He also wasn't speaking English.
I am having a hard time think you aren't trolling. I hope you are.
You may believe that he was white based on fictional pictures produced by others that also have no idea of actual race or appearance. It is your choice to believe as you wish. If you're honest, you may have a little problem when you find a picture of Him as an Oriental, or maybe a Native American, though.
But you have to know that others will base their belief on likely skin color and such by the genetics of the time and geographical location. Something more than a desire that Jesus is their own race, in other words.
Apparently you are the only one who is upset about "Black Santa", as I haven't heard anyone else complain. Such are the trivial matters that the privileged class concerns itself with. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but Santa Claus is a fictional character. That's right, Santa Claus isn't real !!! Your parents are the ones who put the presents under the tree. They are the ones who determined whether you were naughty or nice. Santa Claus was never "coming to town" because Santa Claus was already there. And now for my master stroke. Let the world marvel once again at the superior intellect.
wrenchBiscuit explains The Santa Claus Gift
© 2016 wrenchBiscuit
Since Santa Claus is a fictional character, and since Santa Claus is actually represented by the parents, or anyone else who happens to be the giver of the "Santa Claus" gift, then we can understand that you have no valid argument against Black Santa Claus.Why? Because of the reality of the "Santa Claus Gift" , as opposed to the fiction, we can clearly see that Santa Claus is the color of a rainbow.
When a black child receives the Santa Claus Gift it will most likely be a gift given to them by their black parents. Likewise, the white child receives the Santa Claus Gift from white parents, and so it is the same with all races. The parent truly "is" Santa Claus. Thus, Santa Claus is in truth a rainbow, and a chameleon. Consequently, the notion of a Black Santa Claus is not simply a token gesture meant to appease a minority at the expense of the majority, but rather, it is a matter of fact. It is quite racist indeed for anyone to expect that a black man who has earned the money, and who has provided his children with expensive gifts, should lead his children to believe that it was a white man who bestowed these gifts upon them! In doing so, the white man's generosity is overstated, and the black man's generosity is rendered invisible. Within a system of institutionalized racism, the cumulative effect of perpetuating white European images and values above all others can not only be detrimental to the self-esteem of minority children, but it also creates an illusion of superiority that places unnecessary limitations on cultural exchange, which in turn is a hindrance to the white race as well as minorities.
I would trust a brown Jesus more than a white Jesus. Because God wants us to be Christ like.
People are interracial mixing more and more until some day we will all be Christ like- brown.
That is what happens when you mix all colours together is you get Brown
Irrelevant. Trust based on melanin? Seems to be a weird criteria.
Let's see. Red and yellow make orange, black and white make gray. What does gray and orange make? Don't think it's brown - are we all going to be some ugly, sickly, washed out orangish color?
Or could a little gene splicing produce a whole species of albinos, with semi-transparent skin showing what's underneath? "Wow! Nice duodenum there, and a gorgeous appendix!" Seen some fish like that...
When you mix a black and white person you don't get a grey person, you get a more brown person maybe because white have some reddishness in them. Once you mix a yellow or white with a brown or black, you will get more brown in the end. Brown owns the more of the earth and spirit.
I choose the transparent skin as preferable to all. Easier for a doctor to see what's going on, and instead of admiring a nose or hair (or other less mentionable things) we could be falling for a great pair of lungs or a fantastic kidney. Maybe an exceptionally well formed aorta. Think of the options!
No, it won't. Asia is large and not really intermixing. Africa is large and hardly intermixing. It is only whites who are intermarrying at a high rate, while being called racist routinely despite doing so.
Interesting point. Is it because of innate racism of Asians and Africans, or because of immigration to primarily white areas and out of the others?
I'd have to say the latter, although there does seem to be considerable racism involved when whites move into predominately asia areas.
Yes Asians have racism; China's government is even demanding all non-Han dialects of Chinese be taken off the air for TV shows. Japanese discriminate against the Korean descendants of forced laborers still working there, and they committed major atrocities against the Koreans and Chinese during WW2 because Japan saw them as inferior. The rape of Nanking is just the most well known.
With regard to Africa, it is simply a matter of migration patterns - lots of blacks leaving Africa for Europe and America, few people moving in, and large enough blocks of Lebanese, Indians and Chinese that they have their own enclaves and intermarry.
This is where large scale immigration prevents assimilation - as soon as everyone can have their own enclave, they intermarry and live nearly segregated from larger society. The Armenian quarter in Jerusalem, Chinatowns across the US and Jewish quarters in many cities around the world are examples of this.
We have to decide if we want to risk Balkanization by permitting large scale immigration And that separate tribes model IS the default while hurting social interactions.
Harvard scientist Robert Putnam found that diversity hurts civic life, reduces social trust, pushes tribalism / grouping when the minorities are large enough to form their own enclaves. You don't feel like everyone is part of the same tribe but instead retreat to your own.
Black santa and a black Jesus. Examples of discrimination against white people
Nope. I refuse to believe you are that much of an idiot. You're just trying to get a rise out of people. Well done though. Had me going for a second, but you overplayed it. No one could be that clueless.
I am totally at a loss with all these (supposedly critical or supportive) arguments about Black Jesus, Black Santa, Black on Black racism, etc. Of course, Blacks practice biasedness toward other Blacks, Asian against Asian Indian aginst Indian, dogs against cats.
But, all you White Folks out there, it is Whites, the U.S. White government who are your oppressors. the government dangles White privilege before you to control you, stay in-line and you get a little bit of it, get out-of-line and it is taken away from you.
And, you haven't seen anything yet, just wait until Donald Trump takes office if finally elected the Electorial College, Do you all really believe this guy is on your side?
We shall see because Black Folks already know what to expect, there will be no surprises for us.
im not white but its okay for minorities to make fun of white people but when white people make fun of a minoritie there being racist
I had been making around a thousand dollars per week repairing air conditioning for the wealthiest people in the Dallas, Texas area; but when the summer started to end, the company let me go. I was at the 90th day of employment, and any more than that, and they have to offer you a full time job and benefits.
Well, it was still August, and so I thought I'd be able to find another hvac job. But it didn't happen. It was a cool year that year. Eventually my savings started running out. When you work 80 hours a week you don't have time to spend money, so I had plenty saved. At least I'd thought it was plenty.
One day I went to an East Dallas McDonald's, it was very near to where my efficiency apartment was located. After ordering and receiving my cinnamon sticks and coffee, I asked for an application. I just wanted to keep my efficiency apartment, and not face the shame of having to move back to my parent's property, where I still live (again) today.
But wouldn't you know it? That cute young Hispanic girl who understood me perfectly as I ordered the cinnamon pastry and coffee- she didn't understand the sentence, 'can I have a job application?' She stared at me as though she no hable Ingles, and even said just that.
This is great, finally all that resentment is being honesty admitted. I had no idea so many of you have been keeping all of this under wraps...
There isn't much reason to unwrap it. When a Caucasian is racially discriminated against (or sexually, for that matter) they are either ignored or derided. After all, the law required such action, and some go so far as to say it is impossible, by definition, for a Caucasian to suffer racism (we've seen that here in the forums). It is an accepted practice, with the law backing it up, and not much can be done about it.
How about personally? How have you been discriminated against personally based on your race?
Sure. I went through the period where businesses were forced to hire by race (or sex) rather than ability. I've been told to stay out of specific establishments or seating as they were reserved for blacks. I've been "invisible" in large gatherings of other races. I've watched as a specific race was granted free college tuition while I had to pay for mine, and I've seen the plethora of grants limited to a specific race or sex (but never, ever white males).
And if I wished to, I'm certain that I could uncover other incidents in my past that could be considered racist or discriminatory if I had a big enough chip on my shoulder and went looking to be offended.
You are blaming one of the most persecuted minorities in the history of Western democracies for your ills and condemning any attempt to offer any help.
Other nonsense I've heard:
Poland is poor because of the international Jewish conspiracy.
I can't get my book published because copy editors are always women.
The Illuminati stole my cat.
Blaming? I assigned no blame. Personally I find that the legalized discrimination was a good thing, but it IS time it ended. I don't find that it is OK to provide scholarships and grants based on race alone, or that it is not OK to follow suit for all other races, but it is also being done (as far as I know) only by private groups. Still racist, but at least it is not my government doing it.
And although I haven't been there in 20 years, I suspect that the areas I was forbidden to enter are now happily mixed. That was a long time ago and a long ways away. Same for the free tuition - it was an abysmal failure and I doubt it has been repeated.
Are you implying that it is fine to discriminate as long as a Caucasian, innocent of any racist attitudes, is the victim? Because somewhere in their past there might have existed a slave owner? I'd have to point out that the vast majority of Americans are a mix of races, and the very people doing the discrimination are included in that. I'll also add that whoever you are, whatever you personal family history, discrimination is not OK. That your great grandfather was a slave, that your grandmother was sent to the back of the bus or even that you had a cross burned in your yard does not excuse such behavior.
Until racists reform and persecuted minorities have the same opportunities as everybody else, positive discrimination has a place.
A hundred years ago, in the UK, workers colleges educated working class kids who could not have received a college education by any other means. Women's colleges provided a similar service for another suppressed group. Nowadays, the prejudices that made that necessary are much reduced. Racism seems to be growing in the US.
As far as I can see, the people who complain about positive discrimination are those who feel most insecure. Tackle the insecurities (job issues, political powerlessness etc) rather than focus on false racial constructs and life might improve.
"positive discrimination has a place"
I'm sorry, but there is no "positive discrimination". Even that practiced in the US was certainly not positive for the people that found their road blocked. And if you think that being turned down for a job because your skin is the wrong color is just an "insecurity" then you desperately need to re-think.
Surely you realize that being turned down for a job because your skin is the wrong color is an issue black people face everyday? And have faced in the US since the end of slavery.
People are turned down for jobs simply because they are the wrong gender, too.
This is the way the hierarchy works, more or less, from top to bottom:
ivy league college white men
ivy league college non-white men
ivy league college white women
ivy league college non-white women
other colleges white men
other colleges non-white men
other colleges white women
other colleges non-white women
high school only white men
high school only non-white men
high school only white women
high school only non-white women
I am open to corrections on that list.
"Surely you realize that being turned down for a job because your skin is the wrong color is an issue black people face everyday?"
Yes, although it is not nearly so bad as it was. But surely you realize that that does not make it right to do the same to one of a different color?
There are zero public colleges or high schools (in the US) that only whites, men or women can attend. I don't think there are even any private schools that require such discrimination. So much for your hierarchy.
It doesn't have to be written on a sign at the gate to be effectively a rule.
What I am not seeing is anyone here with an actual story of discrimination, people in actually disadvantaged groups have dozens that are easy to recall.
As a woman I have lost a job to a male candidate who was worse on paper, did poorer in the assessments, and was eventually fired for incompetence. That is not some vague cultural feeling of ennui, that is an actually job I actually lost due purely to discrimination.
That hierarchy is the pecking order for opportunity, employment and income. The US is a typical western society riven by class, race and gender.
At the bottom end, poor whites seem to be the most enthusiastic suppressors of poor blacks which is depressing.
What makes Santa white? And, what is the problem with a black Jesus? They are symbols, and the symbols are what carry the meaning. It is racist attitudes that bring the discontent!
If you look into the dictionary you will find the words related to black has double the negative meaning than the words related to whites.
The system is rigged for Whites. If ever there was an Adam and Eve, they would have been black.
"What makes Santa white?" Good question - seems to me he'd be black after coming down the chimney!
LOL - couldn't resist that one. Actually, the original Santa Claus was Turkish. The version we know came from Germany, as did many Christmas traditions. That's why he is white.
As for Jesus - He was an Arab Jew. Check out locations in the Bible attributed to Him, to see what I mean.
For me, no race is no better or worst than the other.
Courage from a white guy.
The only discrimination I've experienced has been aged discrimination. I've sat at more than one job interview where my resume revealed more experience than my interviewer. You could see them thinking: "I'm not going to hire my mother!"
But compared to racial discrimination - that's not much.
Thank you for posing this question. Honestly I have never faced discrimination as a white person. I don't think it matters much whether your skin is white, black, grey or yellow. Discrimination is in the eye of the beholder. If you are of the easily-discriminated-kind you can be discriminated at Starbucks buying a coffee because you were chipped on the whip cream. Enough said.
From worldwide human historical studies the white is the earliest one to develop. Non whites today are 86% of the world population and longest empire were Egyptians and Chinese.
White skin evolve about 8000 years ago in Europe, where dark skin gose back 200.,000 years.
Personally Being entrapenuer rather than a traditionalist, I have learn more from people of colour than of my own white race. From 50 years of dating women mostly of women of colour have had my fair share of trouble from whites. I don't call whites racist, just think we all put on earth to mix for strength in diversity as it is a total worldwide human ignorance had holds our intelligence back.
In 1967 interracial marriage was made fully legal in North America So it takes a few decades for mixing to catch on , for fear of family and friends reticule. The reality is , we are no better or worst than any other race. That is why the history books are being rewritten or evolving, so we can advance faster and together.
My mom was born in England. My dad born in New York. My father was a privileged (glutton) raised by a black police officer (now retired), and his mixed-race mother (deceased), a wealthy director of nurses for St. Luke's Mental Hospital in New York. My mom was bullied when she moved to America by other black children, because she came from "New England" because "Old England" doesn't have any black people (they used the N-word, btw) in "Old England". My mother always got along with the white kids in school.
Fast forward a few decades and you get to me. My favorite genre of music is punk/rock and musicals(Think: Phantom of the Opera), I love reading sci-fi, and I "talk like a white girl". I've never had a "baby daddy", I tutor mostly white kids, and I graduated with an A.A. Degree while a senior in high school. The point of explaining all this is that discrimination is unacceptable for any race.
There's too much blending of cultures, races, and ethnicity for anyone to be truly against another person. I know it happens, but it's stupid. In fact, I'd compare discrimination between two races as arguing that one blob is better than another blob. If you're all blobs. Who the blob cares?
I'm getting off track, point is, if white people are facing discrimination. I'm sorry. I think people need to get over the foolishness. There are bigger issues than discrimination. There's still starvation in this First World country. There's still violence against women and children. There's still a wage gap. There's still the one percenter issue. There's still an issue with the environment. Discrimination against someone's race is just a drop in the slime bucket of society in general.
"I know in my heart that man is good. That what is right will always eventually triumph. And there's purpose and worth to each and every life." Ronald Reagan
https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/auth … gan_2.html
When I got off of active duty from the Navy I applied for a police job in an upper middle class primarily White suburb of Chicago. I scored 98 on the written test and got five bonus points for being an honorably discharged veteran, giving me a better than perfect score. I did outstanding on the physical fitness tests and had excellent references. Instead of me, they hired a 5' 3', dumpy, Black woman whose speech was so bad she would have had trouble holding down a fast food job. On the few instances I spoke with her she appeared unintelligent and uneducated ( BTW, I was dating a Black lady at the time). I was told, off the record, by people within the department that they had to hire her to kill two birds with one stone with the Equal Opportunity Employment/Affirmative Action people. She lasted less than nine months on the job.
I had a similar experience in South Carolina (where I did eventually become a police officer). The first department I worked at was only interviewing people who got a 90% or better on the written test. I had the highest test score in the history of the city, but they wanted another Black officer. They had three Black applicants who scored 40% or better, none who had reached 50%. They hired one of them. He failed the police academy the first week. They sent him back and he failed the second time after week two. They made him a jailer, but fired him after he contracted an STD from one of the female inmates and brought it home to his wife. They then called me and asked me to reapply, which I did and was then hired.
Those are two of my memorable personal experiences with reverse discrimination. Both times many other people suffered and a lot of times and money was wasted because the most qualified candidate was not hired to begin with.
Sorry to hear, another example of failed Government Policy and bureaucracy hard at work.
Actually, each of those departments could have 'legally' made an exception to government mandate considering the nature of policing. But they did not, probably because government subsidies they receive is more important community needs or from just sheer stupidity. Were evaluators Black or White? How did you do on the psychological fitness test? Were you affiliated with any questionable, dubious, or hate groups?
What did the EEOC say when you complained, was an investigation conducted? It is standard to inform a job applicant of his/her rights when rejected for such reasons, sometimes they even offer the applicant a EEOC complaint form.
Legislation that enacted the EEOC, if what you is true, never intended the Act to reject a qualified job applicant over a minority applicant; any job seeker, especially a White job seeker knows about this. However, again, if what you say is true and you successfully passed the psychological fitness test to hold a badge and you were not affiliated with the KKK, Skinheads, 14’s, or American Nazi Party, then YOU WERE ‘HAD’ and taken for an unscrupulous sucker. No offense!
origin, the recipient must take affirmative action to overcome the effects of prior discrimination.
Now, Affirmation Action, the affirmative action programs are meant to break down barriers, both visible and invisible, to level the playing field, and to make sure everyone is given an equal break. They are not meant to guarantee equal results -- but instead proceed on the common-sense notion that if equality of opportunity were a reality, African Americans, women, people with disabilities and other groups facing discrimination would be fairly represented in the nation's work force and educational institutions. This information is general knowledge, Kowulz.
When you finally landed a job as a Police Agent, did those prior employment rejections invoke rage and anger in you, to the point of operating over and beyond the call of duty, to the point abusing your agency?
On second thought do not answer that, anything you say can and will come back to haunt you if you are even involved in a questionable killing or arrest.
Again, sorry to hear of your experiences of White discrimination.
First of all, thank you for your service.
I sort of wonder that the concept of these Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Programs were designed to create ire and resentment among racial groups, deliberately. As, in my opinion, in your example, they are being used incorrectly.
While I assign value to the idea that the ethnic composition of a police department should reflect that of the community it serves, its consideration should be considerably less than results obtained between various candidates on fair test and exams.
There is no way that someone with a score of 50 or less would be considered over those who score 90 or higher. The idea is that Minority candidates get the opportunity to compete with others and be evaluated and considered for hire on an equal basis. So, the idea is being twisted round. I would say that all candidates must score over 90 on the exam to be considered and with all successful applicants substantially equal, we can now be looked at from a standpoint of force composition, etc. A lily white police department or ebony black one may be intimidating in a mixed community.
The program was designed to insure that Black applicants would be considered, when before they would not be regardless of their qualifications. It remains up to the Black applicants to properly apply themselves to pass the exams which correlate closely to being successful in the actual job. There simply can be no substitute for that.
"There is no way that someone with a score of 50 or less would be considered over those who score 90 or higher."
That you can say this is a clear example of not walking in the other's shoes, for it most definitely WAS done, and done commonly. While (from your viewpoint) the objective was to give a fair chance to minorities, the reality was that companies were heavily fined for not having the "proper" percentage of minority workers. No provision was made for lack of superior quality minorities - all that mattered was that all-important percentage. The assumption, real or fantasized, was that there were equal numbers of both minority and white male candidates, but that assumption failed, and failed badly, in the real world.
As you have so often reiterated, you weren't there and you don't know.
You seem to be misunderstanding me. I am not saying that it has not occurred, but that it is wrong. So, I am attempting to wear this man's shoes.
I never said anything about maintaining quotas to support opportunities for those that are clearly not qualified.
How else can these statements be interpreted?
"There is no way that someone with a score of 50 or less would be considered over those who score 90 or higher."
"The idea is that Minority candidates get the opportunity to compete with others and be evaluated and considered for hire on an equal basis."
"'It remains up to the Black applicants to properly apply themselves to pass the exams which correlate closely to being successful in the actual job."
All of these invalidate that quota system. But the quota system is what was real and practiced, so all of these were NOT used. Lower scores were not only considered, but hired. Minority candidates did not have to compete with anything or anyone; their race was often the deciding factor with ability, experience, etc. all secondary. Blacks very often did not have to "pass" a test - they already passed it by having dark skin. No scores necessary.
They can be interpreted in ways that did not register with you.
I concur with the substance of your post. I don't like this process any more than you do.
Recently (as in less than two years ago) I was working for a retailer at a self-checkout station where a black woman, who was there with her child, left without completing her transaction. It was one of my first times working at the self-checkout and the only thing I knew to do was to call my supervisor after asking the customer to see her receipt - which, of course, she didn't have. The customer then proceeded toward the door while I began communicating with my approaching supervisor. Next thing I knew the customer was standing right in front of me with her cell phone in my face recording my "false and discriminatory accusation" that she had been caught shoplifting. It had all happened so fast that I hadn't had time to go over and look at the self-checkout machine, but did so when my supervisor asked how much she owed. The customer had an unpaid balance of $.40. The customer's actions and communications made me feel like I should have found a way to pay the forty cents for her rather than "falsely" accusing her of stealing.
WOW! $.40 is still $40cents and she should have put something back. Blacks have served 10-year prison terms for such pilferage. Humm, interesting post!
She did end up paying the forty cents AFTER asserting she didn't know she hadn't paid the bill in full AND stating that I simply should have said something. Guess asking to see her receipt was in no way a clue .
Goes to show you, even I am suspect. See how naturally defense comes across when Blacks interact with authority?
Well, now. doesn't that sound a little like stereotyping?
When I go to many Latin countries and see most owning their own home, with closer family ties and friends. Then Little or no worries about private and national debt. Then I tell them that Whites where I come from have less of the basic living covered. They think I am joking and they laugh so hard. Kinda like White Jesus telling people in hell, he is suffering more than them.
Nearly half of Trump White supporters say whites are discriminate a lot. If they are, it is not because so much from other race. We are all in the same boat of the greedy stealing our freedom, our safty and stealing all of our money away. Trump and FED Government and Corporatism is the source of your problem. Fighting your fellow Americans is just what they want. Greedy creates the Monsters and some how have a phony solutions for them while walking away with more of your money.
Interesting argument, although I had to re-read however due to grammar, punctuation, etc. Which raises another valid point, few White commentators on this thread have exceptional academic communication or cognitive intelligence skill sets.
People, how can we communicate if we don't know how to communicate. Only several White commentators display apparent higher academic communication skills, and very few support his/her argument with a reference source. Yes. explanations of personal experiences are important and valid, rules of communications on social media are lax, but one is taken more serious when considerable thought and reflection is put into each post.
This 'run-on' sentence is proof of that. But it gets the point across, yes!
In a question asking people to describe their experiences, it is hypocritical to say "back up your experience with data, too".
I did not suggest "backup data" data is a statistical reference source - the reader can decide to accept it or reject it.
Personal experiences speak for themselves and require no proof, unless says i was told I was denied because I am White, then it is a good idea to offer a case number, etc. I am simply suggesting that it is more believable when someone makes an assertion that is from a personal experience. I do apologize if I was unclear.
CORRECTION ON MY LAST POST
I did not suggest commentators "backup data" data is a statistical reference source - the reader can decide to accept it or reject it depending on where it came from and how obtained.
Furthermore, in any argument, it is a good practice to use source material as proof to convince the audience of your position. Otherwise, you risk being perceived as a liar or unknowledgeable about the subject.
Personal experiences speak for themselves and require no proof unless one asserts denial of employment for being White, which is uncommon because we all want to know this information.
For instance, if I tell you that all White Americans are racist I should have some proof, other than the explanation of a personal experience to back up such a blatant claim. Otherwise, some White readers may say, "I'm not racist, where does this guy get his information?"
Finally, Taramarawhite, there is nothing in my post that is "hypocritical," pretense of having virtues, beliefs, or principles. Thank you.
Growing up in southern California, I was the minority where I lived. They threw rocks at me, jumped me, and taunted me as much as possible. It caused me to be bitter, but I eventually got over it, because I know they're deceived.
Racism is a deception that Satan uses to keep us divided, bitter and violent. Divide and conquer is the oldest trick in The Book, literally.
by preacherdon 7 years ago
Is affirmative action still necessary? It is argued that affirmative action is no longer necessary. Those who are against it say that such regualtions are the reasons employers take their jobs oversseas. Though you can't legislate morality, I think that affirmative action is still necessary because...
by Tom Cornett 9 years ago
Fred Reed is a Police reporter for Washington news papers.Slavery Reparations ..........by Fred Reed!On the Web I find that Henry Louis Gates Jr., the chairman of Afro-AmericanStudies at Harvard, is demanding that whites pay reparations to blacks. It'sbecause of slavery, see. He...
by S Leretseh 5 years ago
If these victims were black and ...well never mind. I'm so sick and tired of saying it ...and seeing it. All the links are 'unprovoked' attacksElderly white male socked in the facehttp://www.surenews.com/crime/assault/b … driver.htmBaltimore:: White male knocked to the ground and...
by danicole 4 years ago
Why do white people do not understand racism?
by Will Apse 2 years ago
I come from a white working class background, so I'm pretty familiar with this issue. My parents were not that bad. They colluded with racism without actively promulgating racist views or working up false justifications. They were typical of the low level racists in the UK at the time. The black...
by Renee S 7 years ago
an African American president made it worse or better in your opinion?
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|