Rapper hangs a kid in his video

September 15, 2017

Just now, StrawberryBlond said:

How is it absurd? Why is it ok to tell a white person that they find a video being negative about their race to be offensive? And if they are offended, it's because they don't understand it? I've already watched it several times. Just because I don't agree with your conclusions doesn't mean I don't understand. I don't know how many times I have to explain this concept. I already said that if he truly believes in the quotes he recited at the end, he wouldn't have made the video like he did. I don't know what part of that statement shows a lack of understanding. I know you're not suggesting this but when you say this kinda thing it comes across like "You don't understand because you're white and can't truly connect." This is what leads to arguments. Like you said, just agree to disagree. And maybe don't dislike my posts in return when I haven't done it to you.

If I disagree I will excuse me no. And let's just agree to disagree. And I didn't know you were white or I seemed to have missed it if you said it. And if you know we will disagree don't quote me. I don't quote you because I try not to go there with you because I actually like you believe it or not. But if I disagree I will press that button.

September 15, 2017

3 minutes ago, DemeLarell said:

If I disagree I will excuse me no. And let's just agree to disagree. And I didn't know you were white or I seemed to have missed it if you said it. And if you know we will disagree don't quote me. I don't quote you because I try not to go there with you because I actually like you believe it or not. But if I disagree I will press that button.

I know I should really leave well enough alone, but I couldn't resist one last time. Seeing as we've talked in PM before, I thought you'd have the overwhelming impression that I was white by this time. And if you like me, well, why are you always arguing with me whenever we speak, don't try to seriously take my views into consideration and refuse to stop speaking to me via PM? You've even said here that if I disagree with you, not to quote you. That doesn't sound like the behaviour of someone who likes you. It sounds like you're doing all you can to avoid me. I certainly don't do that to people I like.

September 15, 2017

29 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

I know I should really leave well enough alone, but I couldn't resist one last time. Seeing as we've talked in PM before, I thought you'd have the overwhelming impression that I was white by this time. And if you like me, well, why are you always arguing with me whenever we speak, don't try to seriously take my views into consideration and refuse to stop speaking to me via PM? You've even said here that if I disagree with you, not to quote you. That doesn't sound like the behaviour of someone who likes you. It sounds like you're doing all you can to avoid me. I certainly don't do that to people I like.

But if you know we disagree you should know it will turn into this. And I understand you fully and disagree with you fully. But that doesn't mean I don't like you. I'm not trying to avoid you but rather these arguments.

September 15, 2017

Just now, DemeLarell said:

But if you know we disagree you should know it will turn into this. And I understand you fully and disagree with you fully. But that doesn't mean I don't like you. I'm not trying to avoid you but rather these arguments.

Because I quote people I disagree with whether I like them or not. I quote them in the hope that they might see something that they didn't consider before, not to start arguments. When people like one another, they can work through disagreements, they can still talk about them, they don't have to cut off any potential disagreements. The world would be a boring place if we just talked about nice stuff constantly with people we liked. If you like someone, you should be able to talk about anything with them. If you like me so much, why refuse to talk to me, when I've offered up the chance to you? If you like me, why do you keep passing up a simple PM discussion? It all leads me to believe you don't like me as much as you claim.

September 16, 2017

4 hours ago, StrawberryBlond said:

Because I quote people I disagree with whether I like them or not. I quote them in the hope that they might see something that they didn't consider before, not to start arguments. When people like one another, they can work through disagreements, they can still talk about them, they don't have to cut off any potential disagreements. The world would be a boring place if we just talked about nice stuff constantly with people we liked. If you like someone, you should be able to talk about anything with them. If you like me so much, why refuse to talk to me, when I've offered up the chance to you? If you like me, why do you keep passing up a simple PM discussion? It all leads me to believe you don't like me as much as you claim.

Ok think what you want. I don't want to fight. And when is the last time we PM?

September 16, 2017

8 hours ago, StrawberryBlond said:

"I know exactly why I feel that way - because you don't put kids in a controversial video, even if what you're doing isn't real. I certainly didn't view it as the audience are going to see the white kid as automatically more innocent because he's white."

Why though? Obviously it makes us very uncomfortable, but if the kid is safe, if the kid isn't harmed in any way, why not? Cool - you don't the think the audience will see a white child as automatically more innocent. The countless studies on this seem to suggest otherwise though:
http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2014/03/black-boys-older.aspx
http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/young-black-girls-less-innocent-study_us_59526e51e4b05c37bb7982d2
https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2014/03/cops-tend-to-see-black-kids-as-less-innocent-than-white-kids/383247/

"That isn't the issue. The issue is a child is depicted as if he's being hung. That's unacceptable no matter what his race is. This is a completely different thing to a real life killing happening to an adult. The two aren't even in the same ball park."

Why not? Why is there no outrage over the depicted violence against Emmett Till? That's also in the video... He was 14... Why no outrage over the footage of Philando Castile actually being shot dead?? He was an innocent man... I know people have a gut reaction to seeing violence against children as something worse, it's a natural response, but it's not a rational one. It's wrong to have a fake depiction of a child being hung, but okay to show actual actual death, violence and suffering.

The child represents innocence, the white child is seen as more innocent than black men and black children - the depicted hanging of this innocent child provides a gut reaction of disgust. It's no doubt confrontational, it no doubt conjures up feelings of disgust and anger, but the kid wasn't actually harmed.

"And that's another thing that gets me - assuming that white people have no compassion for anyone but themselves. That they need something like this to "wake them up." Most of us already find this stuff shocking. Very, very few of us find the unlawful killing of anyone to be acceptable and those of us who do are either locked up or should be. It's the same school of thought that feels a need to state "If you're a parent, you might find this footage distressing" before any shocking footage involving a child, as if they believe a child-less person will be indifferent to it or enjoy it or something. Compassion can be present in all of us, it's not just limited to the mistreated people of society. It's the suggestion that I didn't have the compassion in the first place that offends me more than anything."

I find these discussions very, very difficult to have with you because you seem to lack a basic academic understanding of racism and how it works. You've also just twisted my words into something I haven't said... I didn't say white people lack compassion for anyone but other white people. I didn't suggest you don't have compassion. I said what is a fact, that people view white children as far more innocent than black children and black men. That's what every study into the subject shows.

You're not colorblind either - you see black people differently than you do white people. That's unavoidable, and study after study after study shows that this is true. It shows that we all look at women differently than we look at men, that we all look at people of colour differently than white people, that we all look at people who are disabled differently than people who are able-bodied.

"No, honestly, I don't think the sight of a child seemingly being hung will ever be justifiable in the eyes of the public regardless of the factors involved. It's crazy to think we're still debating if white people would be disgusted or not by the sight of a black child being hung in 2017. What an insult to the many good white people out there."

I wasn't debating on whether white people would be disgusted by the sight of a black child being hung - That's not what I wrote... That's nothing close to what I said. Nobody here is demonizing white people either. Nobody is claiming that white people are incapable of empathy or that they wouldn't feel disgusted by the sight of a black child being hung.

"There was no way he was going to hang this black child. His entire video is an anti-white person message, regardless of what he tries to frame it as. If it was all reversed, a white artist would be called racist for this, no doubt, because we can't make controversial racial videos to make political statements. If we want equality, we have to start treating instances of black racism just as seriously as white racism."

Are you kidding me? His entire video was an anti-white person message???? HOW??? That's just not true, at all. The only thing in the video you could even try to twist as 'anti-white' would be the child hanging scene... But like... That's supposed to make you feel sick, disgusted, uncomfortable. It's not a celebratory moment at all, it's not a moment of retributive justice, it's not once suggested that the child deserved that treatment, it's supposed to be horrific.... You're supposed to feel disturbed. I mean... Read the tone of the piece, there is no music only this hum of white noise supposed to make you feel uncomfortable, there is no dialogue, there is no reaction, the audience just stare at the hanging boy. Then straight after that scene he ends the video discussing instances of white on black violence and black on white violence - how both are disgusting, how both require the youth to stand up and take action.

There is no such thing as racism against white people, certainly not in the U.S. I mean it's all about context, but it would certainly think any white artist depicting the hanging body of a black child would be called out - I mean the entire reason for that is because of the history of white people hanging and lynching black men and black children, the entire reason for that is because of the history of white people watching the lynchings of black men and children for entertainment. We've seen people hang fake president Obamas, hang dolls of Trayvon Martin, hang dolls of black families for halloween. Recently there was an 8 year old black boy in New Hampshire who other kids tried to lynch. There is an entire historical context that cannot be ignored. It's not the same in this instance, the history just isn't the same.

"I've said before that the reasons why the earlier violence was dismissed was that these are involving adults and those who have made their own choices, unlike the children. And no one was saying it was ok to hang a black child to make a political statement. We don't want to see any child being hanged, real or fake."

Uhh... You seem to be proving my original point here? What choices do you think the black men hanging in the tree made? What choice did 14 year old Emmett Till make when beaten, mutilated and hung? What choice did Philando Castile make when he got shot in his car? What choice did Rodney King make when he got beaten by the police? Unless you are talking about the actors making the choice to do these videos?? I mean they use the actual footage of Philando Castile being shot, of Rodney King being beaten - they didn't make any choice?? Idk - confusing paragraph tbh. Of course you don't want to see any child being hung - but that's also the point... I mean... It wasn't a celebratory moment, it wasn't framed in a positive light, it was supposed to be disturbing, it was supposed invoke disgust.

Please watch this...

I know it's long, but honestly it will make these conversations so much easier. You get shocked when you hear people say "All white people are racist", "There is no such thing as racism against white people", "All white people contribute to racial violence" but you don't have the academic background and understanding of why people say this and what they mean.

Dr. Robin Angelo is very highly respected. She is a highly regarded scholar on white racial identity, white fragility (a term she coined), and cross-racial relations and is seen as one of the leading academics in her field. If you really want to have a better understanding about the 'other side' of these discussions then I recommend you watch.

September 16, 2017

Btw. A guy punched him in the face while he's performing. He got exactly what was coming to him

September 16, 2017

16 hours ago, DemeLarell said:

Ok think what you want. I don't want to fight. And when is the last time we PM?

I don't want to fight, I'm just asking to talk. And I'm referring to the last PM discussion we had where we talked about music and you suddenly stated that you wanted to give up talking to me because you didn't like the way I put down some opinions, even if I didn't mean them badly and it would just be for the best if we avoided conversation. It hurt me a lot and I always hoped you'd want to rekindle things again one day but you never did and I didn't want to start up a PM with you just to be ignored. Ever since, we've just had occasional discussions like this, where we don't see eye to eye and you excuse me no. I'm genuinely perplexed as to what I've done that's caused this change and why you claim to still like me despite refusing conversation and shutting me out.

15 hours ago, Bebe said:

"I know exactly why I feel that way - because you don't put kids in a controversial video, even if what you're doing isn't real. I certainly didn't view it as the audience are going to see the white kid as automatically more innocent because he's white."

Why though? Obviously it makes us very uncomfortable, but if the kid is safe, if the kid isn't harmed in any way, why not? Cool - you don't the think the audience will see a white child as automatically more innocent. The countless studies on this seem to suggest otherwise though:
http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2014/03/black-boys-older.aspx
http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/young-black-girls-less-innocent-study_us_59526e51e4b05c37bb7982d2
https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2014/03/cops-tend-to-see-black-kids-as-less-innocent-than-white-kids/383247/

"That isn't the issue. The issue is a child is depicted as if he's being hung. That's unacceptable no matter what his race is. This is a completely different thing to a real life killing happening to an adult. The two aren't even in the same ball park."

Why not? Why is there no outrage over the depicted violence against Emmett Till? That's also in the video... He was 14... Why no outrage over the footage of Philando Castile actually being shot dead?? He was an innocent man... I know people have a gut reaction to seeing violence against children as something worse, it's a natural response, but it's not a rational one. It's wrong to have a fake depiction of a child being hung, but okay to show actual actual death, violence and suffering.

The child represents innocence, the white child is seen as more innocent than black men and black children - the depicted hanging of this innocent child provides a gut reaction of disgust. It's no doubt confrontational, it no doubt conjures up feelings of disgust and anger, but the kid wasn't actually harmed.

"And that's another thing that gets me - assuming that white people have no compassion for anyone but themselves. That they need something like this to "wake them up." Most of us already find this stuff shocking. Very, very few of us find the unlawful killing of anyone to be acceptable and those of us who do are either locked up or should be. It's the same school of thought that feels a need to state "If you're a parent, you might find this footage distressing" before any shocking footage involving a child, as if they believe a child-less person will be indifferent to it or enjoy it or something. Compassion can be present in all of us, it's not just limited to the mistreated people of society. It's the suggestion that I didn't have the compassion in the first place that offends me more than anything."

I find these discussions very, very difficult to have with you because you seem to lack a basic academic understanding of racism and how it works. You've also just twisted my words into something I haven't said... I didn't say white people lack compassion for anyone but other white people. I didn't suggest you don't have compassion. I said what is a fact, that people view white children as far more innocent than black children and black men. That's what every study into the subject shows.

You're not colorblind either - you see black people differently than you do white people. That's unavoidable, and study after study after study shows that this is true. It shows that we all look at women differently than we look at men, that we all look at people of colour differently than white people, that we all look at people who are disabled differently than people who are able-bodied.

"No, honestly, I don't think the sight of a child seemingly being hung will ever be justifiable in the eyes of the public regardless of the factors involved. It's crazy to think we're still debating if white people would be disgusted or not by the sight of a black child being hung in 2017. What an insult to the many good white people out there."

I wasn't debating on whether white people would be disgusted by the sight of a black child being hung - That's not what I wrote... That's nothing close to what I said. Nobody here is demonizing white people either. Nobody is claiming that white people are incapable of empathy or that they wouldn't feel disgusted by the sight of a black child being hung.

"There was no way he was going to hang this black child. His entire video is an anti-white person message, regardless of what he tries to frame it as. If it was all reversed, a white artist would be called racist for this, no doubt, because we can't make controversial racial videos to make political statements. If we want equality, we have to start treating instances of black racism just as seriously as white racism."

Are you kidding me? His entire video was an anti-white person message???? HOW??? That's just not true, at all. The only thing in the video you could even try to twist as 'anti-white' would be the child hanging scene... But like... That's supposed to make you feel sick, disgusted, uncomfortable. It's not a celebratory moment at all, it's not a moment of retributive justice, it's not once suggested that the child deserved that treatment, it's supposed to be horrific.... You're supposed to feel disturbed. I mean... Read the tone of the piece, there is no music only this hum of white noise supposed to make you feel uncomfortable, there is no dialogue, there is no reaction, the audience just stare at the hanging boy. Then straight after that scene he ends the video discussing instances of white on black violence and black on white violence - how both are disgusting, how both require the youth to stand up and take action.

There is no such thing as racism against white people, certainly not in the U.S. I mean it's all about context, but it would certainly think any white artist depicting the hanging body of a black child would be called out - I mean the entire reason for that is because of the history of white people hanging and lynching black men and black children, the entire reason for that is because of the history of white people watching the lynchings of black men and children for entertainment. We've seen people hang fake president Obamas, hang dolls of Trayvon Martin, hang dolls of black families for halloween. Recently there was an 8 year old black boy in New Hampshire who other kids tried to lynch. There is an entire historical context that cannot be ignored. It's not the same in this instance, the history just isn't the same.

"I've said before that the reasons why the earlier violence was dismissed was that these are involving adults and those who have made their own choices, unlike the children. And no one was saying it was ok to hang a black child to make a political statement. We don't want to see any child being hanged, real or fake."

Uhh... You seem to be proving my original point here? What choices do you think the black men hanging in the tree made? What choice did 14 year old Emmett Till make when beaten, mutilated and hung? What choice did Philando Castile make when he got shot in his car? What choice did Rodney King make when he got beaten by the police? Unless you are talking about the actors making the choice to do these videos?? I mean they use the actual footage of Philando Castile being shot, of Rodney King being beaten - they didn't make any choice?? Idk - confusing paragraph tbh. Of course you don't want to see any child being hung - but that's also the point... I mean... It wasn't a celebratory moment, it wasn't framed in a positive light, it was supposed to be disturbing, it was supposed invoke disgust.

Please watch this...

I know it's long, but honestly it will make these conversations so much easier. You get shocked when you hear people say "All white people are racist", "There is no such thing as racism against white people", "All white people contribute to racial violence" but you don't have the academic background and understanding of why people say this and what they mean.

Dr. Robin Angelo is very highly respected. She is a highly regarded scholar on white racial identity, white fragility (a term she coined), and cross-racial relations and is seen as one of the leading academics in her field. If you really want to have a better understanding about the 'other side' of these discussions then I recommend you watch.

You're seriously asking me why I don't think such a scene should be done? Where is the concern for a child's welfare and what they see and how it affects them? Don't underestimate the damage of psychological harm. I can't believe this is even a topic for discussion. I'm pleased to see that the majority of online comments are as concerned as I am about this child's well-being and what state of mind his parents are in to let him do this. I'd feel very frightened to have parents that made decisions like this for me. Luckily, the whole world hasn't gone mad.

These "countless studies" have very little scientific basis. It's so easy to pick out the many flaws in them. The articles don't even mention what kind of questions were asked - we're just supposed to accept it all at face value. Believe it because we're from your political affiliation. Liberals are just as guilty of this as conservatives are. Picking apart flaws in journalism and studies used to be a liberal trait - not any more. Now they just accept it without question. Many studies involving how teachers view their white and black students have been subject to too many flaws to be taken seriously.

Because the violence towards Emmett Till is a reconstruction, not the actual event. And that was hard to watch, for the record, but it was on a very different level and it's hard to even prove how old the people were in that segment. And we don't actually see Philando get shot, we just get shown the faraway footage of the cop beside the car and the gunshots are all reconstructed in the video, we don't even see anyone's face. And as I said before, we already know about all this stuff, we've seen it, we've processed it. The sight of the kid being hung is something new, so the initial shock rocked us and it's all we want to talk about. I'm no psychologist, but it's pretty easy to identify the reasons. And I'm not ok with real clips of death being used either, by the way. I think it disrespects the dead to immortalise the moment and I don't even think such videos should be widely available online (they should be kept strictly for court cases). But at least we didn't actually see the moment of impact.

I don't view children any more of less guilty based on their skin colour. Believe it or not, not all whites hold such prejudice to believe such a thing. It's extremely offensive to believe that we do. I don't believe in demonising anyone until they've done something that gives reason to demonise them.

You find these discussions difficult to have with me? I find them difficult to have with others because they refuse to take my points seriously or absorb them. Now you're telling me that I lack basic academic understanding? I'm no genius and I've never professed to be but don't tell me, a university graduate, that I lack basic academic understanding in something so simple. I wasn't trying to say that you personally were telling me that white people lack compassion, my words were aimed at wider (mostly American) society. And it is not a fact that people view whites as more innocent - some do, some don't. We won't know the proper statistics unless all 7 billion+ of us are interviewed and the study meets a high standard. Until then, we cannot claim that a small portion of society being interviewed with a study that would get an F grade under analysis should be taken as viable and factual.

Of course I have a functioning pair of eyes and I see colour but what colourblindness means is that you see race but don't treat anyone any differently because of it. But from what I've seen, the outrage from POC at the concept of colourblindness, while they might not say it, seems to be that they'd annoyed at the idea that white people will not feel sorry for them and treat them better than themselves. After all, if they don't see colour, then they don't take in the history, segregation, discrimination, pain and day-to-day racism that a minority goes through, right? Meaning, without that knowledge, they won't bestow special treatment upon you. That's too much for certain entitled people to take. And I know it's highly controversial to say that certain people within minorities have self entitlement but I've seen it in action for myself. And if you think white people can be entitled, then you should be able to say the reverse can happen, if you want things to be equal. I've seen minorities demand treatment better than any white person and the scary thing is, they don't even realise that's what they're asking for. Some of them have a very warped sense of what it means to be white in modern society and what we apparently have that they don't. They just see us as one collective group that all think the same, with the same upbringing and opportunities. They just assume they must be getting treated worse because of their skin colour, never looking inward. Well, you have to take responsibility for your actions and how you act is a big part of how you'll be treated, so I think we need a bit more of that teaching in today's society.

I'm not saying you or anyone else in this thread is demonising white people, I'm saying the video is. The video makes huge presumptions about white people and holds us all accountable for the same wrongdoings when not all of us are doing those things. I don't know how you can take a video where a group of mostly black schoolkids overpower and kill a white teacher, allude to moments where whites killed blacks and hang a white child isn't a video to demonise whites. I don't think you'd doubt the purpose of a piece that say, contained images of women being hurt by men as anything other than misogynistic, right? So, why doubt the purpose of a piece where white people are getting hurt by mostly blacks? Why is it always seen that minorities cannot be racist, even when it's staring you in the face?

Again, how can you see such blatant demonisation and hatred of whites in a video and not call it anti-white? I've seen the trope of the old school, disciplinarian Republican teacher berating unruly kids in American media many times. It's a frequent manifestation of white stereotype to demonise. It frames all teachers as evil racists who just want to keep the black kids down and it's very dangerous to raise society on this idea when teachers getting assaulted by students is commonplace now. In my very first post, I stated that the sight of teachers being assaulted really angers me because my aunt's a teacher and has to deal with violent kids every day. It's a very sick trope I've seen recently where the idea of attacking a white teacher is seen as a form of heroism in media such as this. Killing a white teacher and singing on top of his body - how is that not an anti-white agenda? And of course plenty of people will go away with a feeling of discomfort at seeing a white child getting hung...but make no mistake, black supremacists will be watching this video and taking completely the wrong message away. There's always multiple ways that a message can be taken and some people can take it a well-intentioned statement and drive it right into crazy town. It doesn't matter what you meant, some people will twist the message. There are genuine black people out there who want white people dead (they're probably in the 500k+ people who liked this video). Videos like this will only encourage them. I also doubt they'd take his final monologue to heard. Twisted people only see what they want to see.

No, actually, I've seen examples of racism against white people displayed on the internet. A quick YouTube search will enlighten you. Black people rioting while smashing the car windows of white people inside, pulling them to the crowd, beating them up, chanting "black power" through the streets. I don't even dare to watch a video entitled: "Racist pregnant white woman gets beat up." Look up the name Gazi Kodzo - even black people aren't here for his insanity. And look up Kamau Kambon and his speech about how there is no other rational conclusion but to exterminate white people. I really beg to differ that anti-white sentiment is not a thing in America. I've also recently had a few Americans call me racist white names online, something that's never happened until now. But I've had all these instances somehow dismissed, being accused of exaggeration and lies and even laughed at, which shows you how real this issue is. Of course lynching will always have a historical context that will remain tied to black people and that is precisely the reason why it shouldn't be alluded to and depicted anymore. Perhaps the reasons why the incidents you mentioned continue in the modern age is because we keep this historical moment alive in current discourse, so it gives racists bad ideas.

Yes, I was obviously talking about the actors in the video, not the real moments alluded to. Any adult in a controversial video makes a choice. A child gets choices made on their behalf that they don't fully understand. Very different and unacceptable. I've gone over my disapproval of the real camera footage earlier in my post. And again, while I got the desired reaction, there will be people who won't, so to make such a video at such a time when racial tensions and anti-white sentiment is at an all-time high, is very irresponsible.

I didn't watch the whole video, I skimmed it. The sound quality was bad, so I couldn't really get into it. But I watched some other, shorter versions of this woman's videos to condense her message. While I've never watched her in particular, trust me, I have watched so many videos that attempt to "educate" about the nature of white fragility. I can assure you that I already know exactly all the things she was going to say. I have done so much more research on this than you've assumed of me. One of the most offensive things that happens to you when you're white is the assumption that you aren't cultured, that you've never felt the urge to examine the experiences of anyone who isn't like you. I've been a fan of hip hop for years, I have more than enough experience with black culture, as well as many more. I've always been fascinated with other cultures, actually, which is why I chose to study things like sociology and religious studies at university. I was learning about police brutality towards blacks way back as a teenager, in the only designated class concerning social issues which I picked, for crying out loud. Just because I have a rebuttal to a lot of things said by such academics does not mean that I'm uneducated, I just have a different way of looking at things and a different experience to draw on. So many complaints that I've heard voiced by the black community as black-specific issues are things that have happened to me. Naturally, I will not be quiet when this happens, for I want to inform them that their statements are nowhere near as specific as they want to believe, that they are submitting an untrue picture of society based on what they think only happens to them.

I have watched many videos from women like Robin Angelo and can conclude while many of them clearly have good intentions (apart from maybe, Jane Elliott), their view on racial relations and experience through race is very limited. I also think they haven't experienced racial issues outside America and think everywhere operates the same. I would honestly love to sit them all down and have a big chat with them about my experiences and the experiences of many whites and perhaps make them see a side to things that they never considered. Hell, I'd love to write a book on this whole sorry state of affairs and do a talk in front of the world just like them to finally get all my thoughts out there in the open, the extent of which could not be covered in a GGD reply. But I'd be afraid that I'd attract the wrong kind of fans (relating back to again, that point I made where, regardless of intention, the wrong kind of people get the wrong idea) and get targeted by trolls and it's a stress I can't handle. So, GGD replies is where I settle, hoping to change things, expand minds little by little. I doubt I've changed yours but I hope I can at least get a bit of semi respect to at least state how I feel.

September 17, 2017

16 hours ago, StrawberryBlond said:

You're seriously asking me why I don't think such a scene should be done? Where is the concern for a child's welfare and what they see and how it affects them? Don't underestimate the damage of psychological harm. I can't believe this is even a topic for discussion. I'm pleased to see that the majority of online comments are as concerned as I am about this child's well-being and what state of mind his parents are in to let him do this. I'd feel very frightened to have parents that made decisions like this for me. Luckily, the whole world hasn't gone mad.

These "countless studies" have very little scientific basis. It's so easy to pick out the many flaws in them. The articles don't even mention what kind of questions were asked - we're just supposed to accept it all at face value. Believe it because we're from your political affiliation. Liberals are just as guilty of this as conservatives are. Picking apart flaws in journalism and studies used to be a liberal trait - not any more. Now they just accept it without question. Many studies involving how teachers view their white and black students have been subject to too many flaws to be taken seriously.

Because the violence towards Emmett Till is a reconstruction, not the actual event. And that was hard to watch, for the record, but it was on a very different level and it's hard to even prove how old the people were in that segment. And we don't actually see Philando get shot, we just get shown the faraway footage of the cop beside the car and the gunshots are all reconstructed in the video, we don't even see anyone's face. And as I said before, we already know about all this stuff, we've seen it, we've processed it. The sight of the kid being hung is something new, so the initial shock rocked us and it's all we want to talk about. I'm no psychologist, but it's pretty easy to identify the reasons. And I'm not ok with real clips of death being used either, by the way. I think it disrespects the dead to immortalise the moment and I don't even think such videos should be widely available online (they should be kept strictly for court cases). But at least we didn't actually see the moment of impact.

I don't view children any more of less guilty based on their skin colour. Believe it or not, not all whites hold such prejudice to believe such a thing. It's extremely offensive to believe that we do. I don't believe in demonising anyone until they've done something that gives reason to demonise them.

You find these discussions difficult to have with me? I find them difficult to have with others because they refuse to take my points seriously or absorb them. Now you're telling me that I lack basic academic understanding? I'm no genius and I've never professed to be but don't tell me, a university graduate, that I lack basic academic understanding in something so simple. I wasn't trying to say that you personally were telling me that white people lack compassion, my words were aimed at wider (mostly American) society. And it is not a fact that people view whites as more innocent - some do, some don't. We won't know the proper statistics unless all 7 billion+ of us are interviewed and the study meets a high standard. Until then, we cannot claim that a small portion of society being interviewed with a study that would get an F grade under analysis should be taken as viable and factual.

Of course I have a functioning pair of eyes and I see colour but what colourblindness means is that you see race but don't treat anyone any differently because of it. But from what I've seen, the outrage from POC at the concept of colourblindness, while they might not say it, seems to be that they'd annoyed at the idea that white people will not feel sorry for them and treat them better than themselves. After all, if they don't see colour, then they don't take in the history, segregation, discrimination, pain and day-to-day racism that a minority goes through, right? Meaning, without that knowledge, they won't bestow special treatment upon you. That's too much for certain entitled people to take. And I know it's highly controversial to say that certain people within minorities have self entitlement but I've seen it in action for myself. And if you think white people can be entitled, then you should be able to say the reverse can happen, if you want things to be equal. I've seen minorities demand treatment better than any white person and the scary thing is, they don't even realise that's what they're asking for. Some of them have a very warped sense of what it means to be white in modern society and what we apparently have that they don't. They just see us as one collective group that all think the same, with the same upbringing and opportunities. They just assume they must be getting treated worse because of their skin colour, never looking inward. Well, you have to take responsibility for your actions and how you act is a big part of how you'll be treated, so I think we need a bit more of that teaching in today's society.

I'm not saying you or anyone else in this thread is demonising white people, I'm saying the video is. The video makes huge presumptions about white people and holds us all accountable for the same wrongdoings when not all of us are doing those things. I don't know how you can take a video where a group of mostly black schoolkids overpower and kill a white teacher, allude to moments where whites killed blacks and hang a white child isn't a video to demonise whites. I don't think you'd doubt the purpose of a piece that say, contained images of women being hurt by men as anything other than misogynistic, right? So, why doubt the purpose of a piece where white people are getting hurt by mostly blacks? Why is it always seen that minorities cannot be racist, even when it's staring you in the face?

Again, how can you see such blatant demonisation and hatred of whites in a video and not call it anti-white? I've seen the trope of the old school, disciplinarian Republican teacher berating unruly kids in American media many times. It's a frequent manifestation of white stereotype to demonise. It frames all teachers as evil racists who just want to keep the black kids down and it's very dangerous to raise society on this idea when teachers getting assaulted by students is commonplace now. In my very first post, I stated that the sight of teachers being assaulted really angers me because my aunt's a teacher and has to deal with violent kids every day. It's a very sick trope I've seen recently where the idea of attacking a white teacher is seen as a form of heroism in media such as this. Killing a white teacher and singing on top of his body - how is that not an anti-white agenda? And of course plenty of people will go away with a feeling of discomfort at seeing a white child getting hung...but make no mistake, black supremacists will be watching this video and taking completely the wrong message away. There's always multiple ways that a message can be taken and some people can take it a well-intentioned statement and drive it right into crazy town. It doesn't matter what you meant, some people will twist the message. There are genuine black people out there who want white people dead (they're probably in the 500k+ people who liked this video). Videos like this will only encourage them. I also doubt they'd take his final monologue to heard. Twisted people only see what they want to see.

No, actually, I've seen examples of racism against white people displayed on the internet. A quick YouTube search will enlighten you. Black people rioting while smashing the car windows of white people inside, pulling them to the crowd, beating them up, chanting "black power" through the streets. I don't even dare to watch a video entitled: "Racist pregnant white woman gets beat up." Look up the name Gazi Kodzo - even black people aren't here for his insanity. And look up Kamau Kambon and his speech about how there is no other rational conclusion but to exterminate white people. I really beg to differ that anti-white sentiment is not a thing in America. I've also recently had a few Americans call me racist white names online, something that's never happened until now. But I've had all these instances somehow dismissed, being accused of exaggeration and lies and even laughed at, which shows you how real this issue is. Of course lynching will always have a historical context that will remain tied to black people and that is precisely the reason why it shouldn't be alluded to and depicted anymore. Perhaps the reasons why the incidents you mentioned continue in the modern age is because we keep this historical moment alive in current discourse, so it gives racists bad ideas.

Yes, I was obviously talking about the actors in the video, not the real moments alluded to. Any adult in a controversial video makes a choice. A child gets choices made on their behalf that they don't fully understand. Very different and unacceptable. I've gone over my disapproval of the real camera footage earlier in my post. And again, while I got the desired reaction, there will be people who won't, so to make such a video at such a time when racial tensions and anti-white sentiment is at an all-time high, is very irresponsible.

I didn't watch the whole video, I skimmed it. The sound quality was bad, so I couldn't really get into it. But I watched some other, shorter versions of this woman's videos to condense her message. While I've never watched her in particular, trust me, I have watched so many videos that attempt to "educate" about the nature of white fragility. I can assure you that I already know exactly all the things she was going to say. I have done so much more research on this than you've assumed of me. One of the most offensive things that happens to you when you're white is the assumption that you aren't cultured, that you've never felt the urge to examine the experiences of anyone who isn't like you. I've been a fan of hip hop for years, I have more than enough experience with black culture, as well as many more. I've always been fascinated with other cultures, actually, which is why I chose to study things like sociology and religious studies at university. I was learning about police brutality towards blacks way back as a teenager, in the only designated class concerning social issues which I picked, for crying out loud.
d, I just have a different way of looking at things and a different experience to draw on. So many complaints that I've heard voiced by the black community as black-specific issues are things that have happened to me. Naturally, I will not be quiet when this happens, for I want to inform them that their statements are nowhere near as specific as they want to believe, that they are submitting an untrue picture of society based on what they think only happens to them.

I have watched many videos from women like Robin Angelo and can conclude while many of them clearly have good intentions (apart from maybe, Jane Elliott), their view on racial relations and experience through race is very limited. I also think they haven't experienced racial issues outside America and think everywhere operates the same. I would honestly love to sit them all down and have a big chat with them about my experiences and the experiences of many whites and perhaps make them see a side to things that they never considered. Hell, I'd love to write a book on this whole sorry state of affairs and do a talk in front of the world just like them to finally get all my thoughts out there in the open, the extent of which could not be covered in a GGD reply. But I'd be afraid that I'd attract the wrong kind of fans (relating back to again, that point I made where, regardless of intention, the wrong kind of people get the wrong idea) and get targeted by trolls and it's a stress I can't handle. So, GGD replies is where I settle, hoping to change things, expand minds little by little. I doubt I've changed yours but I hope I can at least get a bit of semi respect to at least state how I feel.

"You're seriously asking me why I don't think such a scene should be done? Where is the concern for a child's welfare and what they see and how it affects them?"

There is no concern, because the child isn't actually experiencing anything traumatic....

"These "countless studies" have very little scientific basis. It's so easy to pick out the many flaws in them. The articles don't even mention what kind of questions were asked"

Except they do... They have a clear methodology... They have been reproduced multiple times on end...
Studies like the infamous doll study

There was the other study with children that asked kids a bunch of questions over who what happened in one of these scenarios (they also switched out gender to eliminate bias there):

120420095222-swingset-horizontal-large-g

When asked what happened, respondents were far more likely to say the black child pushed the white child off the swing, while the black kid just fell off. They were also more likely to report that the black kid fell over and dropped his/her books, with the white kid going to help and that the black kid pushed the white kid over and made them drop the books.

Studies like the one from Hetey and Eberhardt in which people were shown a video that flashed 80 mug shots of black and white male inmates.

Unbeknownst to the participants, Hetey and Eberhardt had “manipulated the ratio of black to white inmates, to portray racial disparities in the prison population as more or less extreme.” Some participants saw a video in which 25 percent of the photos were of black inmates, approximating the actual distribution of inmates in California prisons, while others saw a video in which 45 percent of photos were black inmates.

After viewing the mug shots, participants were informed about California’s “three-strikes” law—which mandates harsh sentences on habitual offenders with three or more convictions—and asked to rate it on a scale of 1 (“not punitive enough”) to 7 (“too punitive”). Then participants were shown a petition to amend the law to make it less harsh, which they could sign if they wanted.

The results were staggering. More than half of the participants who viewed the “less-black” photographs agreed to sign the petition. But of those who viewed the “more-black” photographs, less than 28 percent agreed to sign. And punitiveness had nothing to do with it. The outcome was as true for participants who said the law was too harsh as it was for those who said it wasn’t harsh enough.

Studies like this one: http://204.14.132.173/pubs/journals/releases/psp-a0035663.pdf

Which is an amalgamation of multiple studies, with their methodology outlined, showing multiple times how black children are consistently seen as older and less innocent...This is something well established, it's been shown time and time again.

It's also something we can observe in the real world... Black teenagers are consistently given harsher sentencing in the criminal justice system than their white counterparts. We see it in the shooting of Tamir Rice, Jordan Edwards, Trayvon Martin. We see it in the huge racial gaps in arrests, convictions, and sentences. We see it in the rampant police violence.

We see it in statistic like this:

We see it in statistics that show, with stop and frisk laws in N.Y.C, 80 percent of those stops were of Black and Latinos who comprise 25 and 28 percent of N.Y.C.’s total population. Chicago police do the same thing stopping even more people also in a racially discriminatory way with 72 percent of the stops of Black people even though the city is 32 percent Black.

Police traffic stops also racially target people in cars. Black drivers are 31 percent more likely to be pulled over than white drivers and Hispanic drivers are 23 percent more likely to be pulled over than white drivers. Connecticut, in an April 2015 report, on 620,000 traffic stops which revealed widespread racial profiling, particularly during daylight hours when the race of driver was more visible. Once stopped, Black and Hispanic motorists are more likely to be given tickets than white drivers stopped for the same offenses.

Once stopped, Blacks and Latinos are also more likely to be searched. DOJ reports Black drivers at traffic stops were searched by police three times more often and Hispanic drivers two times more often than white drivers. A large research study in Kansas City found when police decided to pull over cars for investigatory stops, where officers look into the car’s interior, ask probing questions and even search the car, the race of the driver was a clear indicator of who was going to be stopped: 28 percent of young Black males twenty five or younger were stopped in a year’s time, versus white men who had 12 percent chance and white women only a seven percent chance. In fact, not until Black men reach 50 years old do their rate of police stops for this kind of treatment dip below those of white men twenty five and under.

In schools, African American kids are much more likely to be referred to the police than other kids. African American students are 16 percent of those enrolled in schools but 27 percent of those referred to the police.

Though Black people make up about 12 percent of the U.S. population, Black children are 28 percent of juvenile arrests.

People of colour, specifically black people, are consistently seen as more suspicious and less innocent. Black children are consistently seen as older and less innocent. That's just a fact that's been demonstrated time and time again.

"Now you're telling me that I lack basic academic understanding? I'm no genius and I've never professed to be but don't tell me, a university graduate, that I lack basic academic understanding in something so simple."

Yes, I absolutely will.

#1 you're calling the philosophy and sociology of race "simple"
#2 you say things like "No, actually, I've seen examples of racism against white people displayed on the internet. A quick YouTube search will enlighten you." that shows a blatant misunderstanding of what racism is (You are talking about instances of anti-white prejudice and bigotry, not racism... There is no such thing as racism against white people in the U.S - or countries like the U.K)
#3 I've seen you actively fight against the concept of 'white privilage'
#4 I've seen you actively deny the possibility that you could hold biases when it comes to race (because, as a feminist, you have already scoured your mind for the possibility of hidden biases and there is just no chance)
#5 I've seen you make comments such as "I was taught to treat everybody the same".
#6 You say things like "Just because I have a rebuttal to a lot of things said by such academics does not mean that I'm uneducated" without actually providing a rebuttal to what academics say and while consistently displaying some of the behaviours they talk about.
#7 "I was learning about police brutality towards blacks way back as a teenager, in the only designated class concerning social issues which I picked, for crying out loud" You apparently took one class concerning social issues and that's your basis for understanding racism.

This isn't a question of intelligence, you're clearly very smart, but on this issue you clearly don't have any real background on the subject. If you think that racism=prejudice=bigotry then you have a very basic understanding of race and you don't have any basic academic understanding of the subject You don't have a grasp on the basic terminology let alone an understanding of how certain power structures were created, how they are upheld, how institutional discrimination works or an understanding of the reality of how racism manifests itself today.

Racism, as well as every other "ism", requires power and systems in order to engage in. Racism is a socially constructed reality at the heart of society's structures. Racism is the deliberate structuring of privilege by means of an objective, differential and unequal treatment of people, for the purpose of social advantage over scarce resources, resulting in an ideology of supremacy which justifies power of position by placing a negative meaning on perceived or actual biological/cultural differences.

White people can't be the victims of racism, because on the the societal level they control the power. The U.S (and similar countries) were built upon, and operate under, white supremacy. They can be the victims of prejudice and bigotry, but you can't link that to any historical, societal, structural, cultural hierarchies of power under which white people are discriminated against on an institutional level.

Also please don't say things like "One of the most offensive things that happens to you when you're white is the assumption that you aren't cultured, that you've never felt the urge to examine the experiences of anyone who isn't like you" you constantly say stuff like this to me. I'm white, you don't need to tell me what it's like to be white.

That's all I can really bare to write to you... I'm sorry, but it is genuinely very difficult to have these conversations with you. You deny the possibility that you can hold any hidden bias (despite the fact that hidden biases tend to be hidden and we all hold biases), you don't understand the basic mechanisms of racism... You deny scientific evidence that has been replicated and proven time and time again while you casually rant for an entire paragraph about how so many people of colour are entitled and how you know all this through 'personal experience' and anecdotal evidence.

I can't see any point in these discussions with you. You seem to constantly be trying to deny that there is a difference between white people and black people, you honestly often come across as the case study for white fragility and you don't have a basic grasp of racism or it's mechanisms.

Honestly, some of the things you say make my jaw drop to the ground...

"what colourblindness means is that you see race but don't treat anyone any differently because of it. But from what I've seen, the outrage from POC at the concept of colourblindness, while they might not say it, seems to be that they'd annoyed at the idea that white people will not feel sorry for them and treat them better than themselves. After all, if they don't see colour, then they don't take in the history, segregation, discrimination, pain and day-to-day racism that a minority goes through, right? Meaning, without that knowledge, they won't bestow special treatment upon you. That's too much for certain entitled people to take."

Like... I don't know where to begin with this... On one level you seem to acknowledge that a minority experiences "segregation, discrimination, pain and day-to-day racism" and acknowledge that there is a history of racism that influences our present... But then you make it about "Oh POC want us to feel sorry for them and want special treatment!!"

No...

The problem with a phrase like "“I am colorblind. I see people, not color. We are all the same.” is:

Colorblindness foists whiteness on everyone. It is another way of saying, “I view everyone as if they were white.” Your default color for sameness is white.

Colorblindness strips non-white people of their uniqueness.Your default culture for sameness is white culture. When you encourage your child to be colorblind and view everyone as “the same,” you are projecting white on people of who aren’t white, negating their experiences, traditions, and uniqueness.

Colorblindness suppresses critically important narratives of oppression. Once you view everyone through a colorblind, white lens, you deny the reality that non-white people face. This isn't important because POC 'want special treatment' and are entitled. After police shot and killed Philando Castile, a black man, the Governor of Minnesota asked, “Would this have happened if those passengers, the driver here were white? I don’t think it would have.” Philando Castile’s blackness is essential to an honest narrative of his death. Colorblindness assumes that a white man would have been shot in a similar manner that day.

Colorblindness assumes everyone has the same experience. When you fail to see color, you fail to recognize injustice and oppression. Comedian Louis CK explains the fallacy of this assumption brilliantly. “I love being white,” he says. “Here’s how great it is to be white: If I would have a time machine, I could go to any time and it would be awesome when I get there! That is exclusively a white privilege! Black people cant f— with time machines!”

Colorblindness promotes the idea that non-white races are inferior. When you teach your child to be colorblind, you are essentially telling them, “If someone isn’t white, pretend they look like you so you can be friends.” Stripping people of a fundamental aspect of their identity by claiming not to see color is dehumanizing.

Promoting colorblindness is easy. Colorblindness eliminates the need to recognize and discuss extremely uncomfortable realities while perpetuating a culture of racism, injustice, and oppression.

I understand the sound quality of the video isn't fantastic, but it's an introductory lecture into the topic - it's her best video for beginners in my experience - and it will at the very least allow you to understand the definition of the terminology we are using
Despite what you think, you clearly don't know what she is going to say. She had a great explanation on the problem of colour blindness, she had a great bit about the difference between racism and prejudice and she had a great bit about why white people can't face racism.

September 17, 2017

16 hours ago, Bebe said:

"You're seriously asking me why I don't think such a scene should be done? Where is the concern for a child's welfare and what they see and how it affects them?"

There is no concern, because the child isn't actually experiencing anything traumatic....

"These "countless studies" have very little scientific basis. It's so easy to pick out the many flaws in them. The articles don't even mention what kind of questions were asked"

Except they do... They have a clear methodology... They have been reproduced multiple times on end...
Studies like the infamous doll study

There was the other study with children that asked kids a bunch of questions over who what happened in one of these scenarios (they also switched out gender to eliminate bias there):

When asked what happened, respondents were far more likely to say the black child pushed the white child off the swing, while the black kid just fell off. They were also more likely to report that the black kid fell over and dropped his/her books, with the white kid going to help and that the black kid pushed the white kid over and made them drop the books.

Studies like the one from Hetey and Eberhardt in which people were shown a video that flashed 80 mug shots of black and white male inmates.

Unbeknownst to the participants, Hetey and Eberhardt had “manipulated the ratio of black to white inmates, to portray racial disparities in the prison population as more or less extreme.” Some participants saw a video in which 25 percent of the photos were of black inmates, approximating the actual distribution of inmates in California prisons, while others saw a video in which 45 percent of photos were black inmates.

After viewing the mug shots, participants were informed about California’s “three-strikes” law—which mandates harsh sentences on habitual offenders with three or more convictions—and asked to rate it on a scale of 1 (“not punitive enough”) to 7 (“too punitive”). Then participants were shown a petition to amend the law to make it less harsh, which they could sign if they wanted.

The results were staggering. More than half of the participants who viewed the “less-black” photographs agreed to sign the petition. But of those who viewed the “more-black” photographs, less than 28 percent agreed to sign. And punitiveness had nothing to do with it. The outcome was as true for participants who said the law was too harsh as it was for those who said it wasn’t harsh enough.

Studies like this one: http://204.14.132.173/pubs/journals/releases/psp-a0035663.pdf

Which is an amalgamation of multiple studies, with their methodology outlined, showing multiple times how black children are consistently seen as older and less innocent...This is something well established, it's been shown time and time again.

It's also something we can observe in the real world... Black teenagers are consistently given harsher sentencing in the criminal justice system than their white counterparts. We see it in the shooting of Tamir Rice, Jordan Edwards, Trayvon Martin. We see it in the huge racial gaps in arrests, convictions, and sentences. We see it in the rampant police violence.

We see it in statistic like this:

We see it in statistics that show, with stop and frisk laws in N.Y.C, 80 percent of those stops were of Black and Latinos who comprise 25 and 28 percent of N.Y.C.’s total population. Chicago police do the same thing stopping even more people also in a racially discriminatory way with 72 percent of the stops of Black people even though the city is 32 percent Black.

Police traffic stops also racially target people in cars. Black drivers are 31 percent more likely to be pulled over than white drivers and Hispanic drivers are 23 percent more likely to be pulled over than white drivers. Connecticut, in an April 2015 report, on 620,000 traffic stops which revealed widespread racial profiling, particularly during daylight hours when the race of driver was more visible. Once stopped, Black and Hispanic motorists are more likely to be given tickets than white drivers stopped for the same offenses.

Once stopped, Blacks and Latinos are also more likely to be searched. DOJ reports Black drivers at traffic stops were searched by police three times more often and Hispanic drivers two times more often than white drivers. A large research study in Kansas City found when police decided to pull over cars for investigatory stops, where officers look into the car’s interior, ask probing questions and even search the car, the race of the driver was a clear indicator of who was going to be stopped: 28 percent of young Black males twenty five or younger were stopped in a year’s time, versus white men who had 12 percent chance and white women only a seven percent chance. In fact, not until Black men reach 50 years old do their rate of police stops for this kind of treatment dip below those of white men twenty five and under.

In schools, African American kids are much more likely to be referred to the police than other kids. African American students are 16 percent of those enrolled in schools but 27 percent of those referred to the police.

Though Black people make up about 12 percent of the U.S. population, Black children are 28 percent of juvenile arrests.

People of colour, specifically black people, are consistently seen as more suspicious and less innocent. Black children are consistently seen as older and less innocent. That's just a fact that's been demonstrated time and time again.

"Now you're telling me that I lack basic academic understanding? I'm no genius and I've never professed to be but don't tell me, a university graduate, that I lack basic academic understanding in something so simple."

Yes, I absolutely will.

#1 you're calling the philosophy and sociology of race "simple"
#2 you say things like "No, actually, I've seen examples of racism against white people displayed on the internet. A quick YouTube search will enlighten you." that shows a blatant misunderstanding of what racism is (You are talking about instances of anti-white prejudice and bigotry, not racism... There is no such thing as racism against white people in the U.S - or countries like the U.K)
#3 I've seen you actively fight against the concept of 'white privilage'
#4 I've seen you actively deny the possibility that you could hold biases when it comes to race (because, as a feminist, you have already scoured your mind for the possibility of hidden biases and there is just no chance)
#5 I've seen you make comments such as "I was taught to treat everybody the same".
#6 You say things like "Just because I have a rebuttal to a lot of things said by such academics does not mean that I'm uneducated" without actually providing a rebuttal to what academics say and while consistently displaying some of the behaviours they talk about.
#7 "I was learning about police brutality towards blacks way back as a teenager, in the only designated class concerning social issues which I picked, for crying out loud" You apparently took one class concerning social issues and that's your basis for understanding racism.

This isn't a question of intelligence, you're clearly very smart, but on this issue you clearly don't have any real background on the subject. If you think that racism=prejudice=bigotry then you have a very basic understanding of race and you don't have any basic academic understanding of the subject You don't have a grasp on the basic terminology let alone an understanding of how certain power structures were created, how they are upheld, how institutional discrimination works or an understanding of the reality of how racism manifests itself today.

Racism, as well as every other "ism", requires power and systems in order to engage in. Racism is a socially constructed reality at the heart of society's structures. Racism is the deliberate structuring of privilege by means of an objective, differential and unequal treatment of people, for the purpose of social advantage over scarce resources, resulting in an ideology of supremacy which justifies power of position by placing a negative meaning on perceived or actual biological/cultural differences.

White people can't be the victims of racism, because on the the societal level they control the power. The U.S (and similar countries) were built upon, and operate under, white supremacy. They can be the victims of prejudice and bigotry, but you can't link that to any historical, societal, structural, cultural hierarchies of power under which white people are discriminated against on an institutional level.

Also please don't say things like "One of the most offensive things that happens to you when you're white is the assumption that you aren't cultured, that you've never felt the urge to examine the experiences of anyone who isn't like you" you constantly say stuff like this to me. I'm white, you don't need to tell me what it's like to be white.

That's all I can really bare to write to you... I'm sorry, but it is genuinely very difficult to have these conversations with you. You deny the possibility that you can hold any hidden bias (despite the fact that hidden biases tend to be hidden and we all hold biases), you don't understand the basic mechanisms of racism... You deny scientific evidence that has been replicated and proven time and time again while you casually rant for an entire paragraph about how so many people of colour are entitled and how you know all this through 'personal experience' and anecdotal evidence.

I can't see any point in these discussions with you. You seem to constantly be trying to deny that there is a difference between white people and black people, you honestly often come across as the case study for white fragility and you don't have a basic grasp of racism or it's mechanisms.

Honestly, some of the things you say make my jaw drop to the ground...

"what colourblindness means is that you see race but don't treat anyone any differently because of it. But from what I've seen, the outrage from POC at the concept of colourblindness, while they might not say it, seems to be that they'd annoyed at the idea that white people will not feel sorry for them and treat them better than themselves. After all, if they don't see colour, then they don't take in the history, segregation, discrimination, pain and day-to-day racism that a minority goes through, right? Meaning, without that knowledge, they won't bestow special treatment upon you. That's too much for certain entitled people to take."

Like... I don't know where to begin with this... On one level you seem to acknowledge that a minority experiences "segregation, discrimination, pain and day-to-day racism" and acknowledge that there is a history of racism that influences our present... But then you make it about "Oh POC want us to feel sorry for them and want special treatment!!"

No...

The problem with a phrase like "“I am colorblind. I see people, not color. We are all the same.” is:

Colorblindness foists whiteness on everyone. It is another way of saying, “I view everyone as if they were white.” Your default color for sameness is white.

Colorblindness strips non-white people of their uniqueness.Your default culture for sameness is white culture. When you encourage your child to be colorblind and view everyone as “the same,” you are projecting white on people of who aren’t white, negating their experiences, traditions, and uniqueness.

Colorblindness suppresses critically important narratives of oppression. Once you view everyone through a colorblind, white lens, you deny the reality that non-white people face. This isn't important because POC 'want special treatment' and are entitled. After police shot and killed Philando Castile, a black man, the Governor of Minnesota asked, “Would this have happened if those passengers, the driver here were white? I don’t think it would have.” Philando Castile’s blackness is essential to an honest narrative of his death. Colorblindness assumes that a white man would have been shot in a similar manner that day.

Colorblindness assumes everyone has the same experience. When you fail to see color, you fail to recognize injustice and oppression. Comedian Louis CK explains the fallacy of this assumption brilliantly. “I love being white,” he says. “Here’s how great it is to be white: If I would have a time machine, I could go to any time and it would be awesome when I get there! That is exclusively a white privilege! Black people cant f— with time machines!”

Colorblindness promotes the idea that non-white races are inferior. When you teach your child to be colorblind, you are essentially telling them, “If someone isn’t white, pretend they look like you so you can be friends.” Stripping people of a fundamental aspect of their identity by claiming not to see color is dehumanizing.

Promoting colorblindness is easy. Colorblindness eliminates the need to recognize and discuss extremely uncomfortable realities while perpetuating a culture of racism, injustice, and oppression.

I understand the sound quality of the video isn't fantastic, but it's an introductory lecture into the topic - it's her best video for beginners in my experience - and it will at the very least allow you to understand the definition of the terminology we are using
Despite what you think, you clearly don't know what she is going to say. She had a great explanation on the problem of colour blindness, she had a great bit about the difference between racism and prejudice and she had a great bit about why white people can't face racism.

The child is still having the experience of a noose put around their neck and they'll see the result later on. And the black child had to watch this as well. I know such an experience would do harm to me as a child.

I'm talking about the specific articles you send me in your original post, not the ones you have just gone to on to explain. But nevertheless...

I have watched many incarnations of the doll experiment and can conclude that the makers of this really didn't understand how children work. Children, when presented with 2 options, especially by an adult (who they've been taught to respect), tend to pick one of them, even when they don't agree with either (though the study has never included the children who couldn't choose, ran away and cried). I know if I were asked these questions at that age, I wouldn't be able to choose but would feel pressured to because you can't defy an adult by denying the options they've presented to you. And when pressured, children tend to go for the "safe" option, namely the one that's the most common to them. As there are more white dolls in American society than black dolls, they likely think these dolls are more normal, hence "good." Children are still working out the true significance of good and bad at this age, and both words can mean different things, coming from different people, in different situations. There doesn't need to be anything evil behind that, it's just a basic, child reaction to a world that they are still trying to work out. When they say the black dolls are bad because of reasons like "he hits other people," you can tell that is a direct projection of a way that they once saw a black child misbehaving. As an adult, we'd know not to associate every display of blackness with one negative experience, but a child hasn't grasped this concept yet, but in most cases, it will come. You know that any white child who said the white doll was bad for the same reason wouldn't have batted an eyelid. Because hating on your own race when you're white is seem as normal, healthy, because let's face it, a lot of white people are evil, right? No one would think that child was self-hating and had to be re-programmed to love themselves, right? Also, it's natural for children to pick the doll that looks like them, that's the whole reason why multi-racial dolls were created - so children in a growing multi-cultural America could experience the same self-love that white children feel. These studies were mostly edited to show only the reactions the makers wanted you to see (plenty of black children did pick the black doll, but these choices are skimmed over). We don't even know for a fact if all these children genuinely made these decisions or if they were forced to, to set an agenda. Judging by how uncomfortable some of them look, I wouldn't be surprised. I'd also like to add that most of these dolls are really ugly and scary. That's why the children never seem particularly drawn to either of them. Black baby dolls look nothing like real black babies. Black babies look adorable, perhaps the most beautiful babies I've ever seen. I've seen countless white people cooing over black babies and children. But black baby dolls and any kind of baby doll, freak me and a lot of people out, with their overly huge, googly eyes and their creepy little hands. This is why I'd be completely lost as to what to choose at that age. I see one kid was brave enough to say "neither" but most kids would not believe that they have that option. Try giving them real black children, instead of dolls. Then we might get a more accurate picture.

As for the swing experiment, both pictures look exactly the same to me, just races reversed. Both look like they just fell off the swing or are even sitting on the ground, with a weird looking starey kid behind them. Same with the books. I actually think, in both cases, it looks like the person on foot looks like they're attempting to help them. There's no "right" way to interpret these things. A lot of things can be percieved totally differently and the other person can't work out why. I once drew something head-on and others assumed it was a birdseye view. I've had to look at paused images over and over to see a shape that other people can see that I can't see. They actually get annoyed when you can't see it and refuse to believe it might just all be in their mind! My views towards "innocent and guilty party" studies have always differed depending on facial expression, body language, etc. You know, intellectual, psychological analysis. Are there people who automatically demonise POC in all these situations? Absolutely. But there can be multiple reasons for why people make the choice they make, there doesn't always have to be a sinister reason behind it.

Again, the prison example is a bit over-complicated and that's what yields results like this. There's no way of proving that everyone who said that the punishment should be harsher on the altered black statistics, they were just unlucky enough to be in the group who were presented with this, so they look racist, when in actual fact, some of them just might have severe views on drug laws, regardless of race involved. Sometimes, it would help if the question holders were just honest about what they were doing. Just overtly ask: "Do you think black criminals should have more severe sentencing than white criminals?" I know you might say that people never respond honestly when it's this direct but seriously, racists don't give a damn about showing their true feelings when it comes to the subject of crime, in particular. That's one topic where they seem to feel no need to hide. Most racists know what they're doing is bad, but they don't care. They don't take an accusation of racism as offensive, they just take it as a non-contentious statement of fact.

Understand that these are American studies and therefore, perception of race will be different compared to worldwide. There is nowhere near the level of anti-black sentiment in the UK than there is in America because racial situations were never as bad over here. Even Americans who didn't believe in everything I said agreed with me on this one. So, I just can't relate to studies saying that black children are seen as consistently older and less innocent. In my culture, we just aren't like this. White people are different all over the world and the whole world does not follow American racial perceptions.

Now, I really can't argue much regarding the crime statistics when it comes to rates of being pulled over, stop and search, racial profiling, etc. I've never denied that's a problem. However, I think it's a sign that crime is so rampant in these communities that it's come to this. The bad people in non-white races have made it hard for the good ones. When they only make up a small percentage of the population but so many of this small percentage is causing disproportionate levels of crime, it's going to have a knock-on effect on everyone in the race, including the law-abiding ones. I think non-white communities need to re-evaluate how they are raising their children, what culture they're glorifying to them and what expectations they are placing on them. White communities are already encouraged to do this, to tame our unruly children. When children are raised with boundaries, consume approved media, are taught respect by their parents and are raised to aim high in life and achieve anything they want, they are far less likely to turn to criminality. I watched an episode of World's Strictest Parents where 2 badly-behaved teenagers in the UK were sent to live with a black family in Atlanta. This family were rich, they lived in a house and a neighbourhood these kids could only dream of. They were pastors and owned their own church. They raised their sons to be moral, respectful and hardworking. They sent them to a private Christian academy (although not stated, it was clearly a black school, as the UK guests were the only white ones there and even all the teachers were black). These black schoolchildren were so well-behaved and aimed to be teachers, lawyers, doctors, a world away from the expectations these white British kids were under. It just goes to show that being raised in a good environment, with a strict but loving parents who are attentive and responsible, can be fundamental in where a child will end up in life, regardless of race. Also, plenty of poor black children grow up to be contributing members of society - being poor is not always an excuse and I've actually heard black people who came from this set-up say that they too hate this excuse.

#1 - I'm meaning that the concept of race and racism isn't hard to understand. WE all have varying degrees of melanin in us, some more than others, and those varying degrees are what race is. And while some of us are ok with this, others see it as a problem that must lead to separation and punishment and that's what racism is. Not hard to figure out. I know I'm just talking about in the most basic of ways, but that was the whole point, I was just taking it down to the root.

#2 - Here we go again with the "bigotry and prejudice can exist against whites but not racism" fallacy. People who say this either haven't had it happen to them/haven't examined real cases on hate crimes against whites. It's hard to believe there's no racism against whites when...white BLM protesters are attacked by fellow black BLM supporters, a white woman is attacked by a black woman on a bus for no reason, when a white kid is chased home by black kids who douse him in lighter fluid and tell him "white boy, this is what you deserve," when a disabled white man is captured by a group of black youths who assault him and chant racist abuse at him, when a white woman is raped by a black man who shouted racist abuse at her throughout and when a white couple are carjacked by a group of black people who take them back to their house, rape and torture them, shoot the guy multiple times to death on the train tracks and then bind the woman, pour a chemical substance down her throat and on her body and leave her to suffocate in a trashcan. In most of these cases, hate crime charges were not filed and were only covered by local news stations, at most. The last instance didn't even make national news and did not result in hate crime charges, despite the severity of it. If these instances are not hate crime, I don't know what is.

#3 - White privilege does exist, but it depends on the situation. For example, if everyone in an area is white, you are no more or less privileged, racially, than everyone else and everyone is on the same level. However, if a black person entered this equation, white privilege would start to become a factor somewhat. But this privilege is not always present in many situations and many white people will clarify to you that it has not helped them be treated any better than people of other races. I can tell you that from experience. I've grown up with many white people being mean to me for no reason in an all-white area (even from a distance, for my natural appearance) and still experience it. Even when being and looking totally innocent, I've had white adults and white authority figures be mean or unfair to me, even demonise me. I've never had any romantic interaction in my life - even white men don't approach me. I've never even had a paid job in my life, no one will hire me, even with my educational background, even when interviewed by whites. When I see Americans go on about this white privilege, I understand it and yes, it's true...but I personally can't relate.

#4 - I do hold biases and I'm not proud of them, but they're not racial ones. The biases that I do have are against certain types of people in my own race, actually, due to bad experiences. But because I've never had any truly bad experiences with minorities, I don't feel the need to hold any bias against them. I actually feel safer around minorities in my country than people of my own race, actually. Why must all white people hold racial biases towards other races? No one is born inherently racist, it's a learned behaviour and I don't remember every encountering any such lesson. Even as a child, I questioned exclusion or ill treatment of any kind.

#5 - Yes...being taught to treat everyone the same makes you likely to grow into a racist now? This is how warped society is, when even the best life lessons are being twisted to be sinister when a white person says them.

#6 - I haven't made a rebuttal because there's too much to fit into one post. I'd have to do it every couple of seconds, which doesn't bode well for a 1 hour video. I don't mean to sound pompous, but these academics sound as if they haven't experienced very much life outside their comfort zone, as if they're ignorant to any exceptions to the rule, any other way of being. They have a set image of a white person in their head and believe us all to be roughly the same, bringing no thought for culture, upbringing, etc. to the table, just their limited American viewpoint. I also think they can't do a lot of self-analysis. Part of the reason I take so long to write replies is because I think stuff out, let it hold for a while, try to break it down as if I was the opposer, in order to test its capability. And sometimes that's when I realise it's a rubbish idea and dispose of it. That's why I'm so confident in my beliefs - I've tried and tested them by being my own worst critic. But within 30 seconds or so of a theory being presented to me by one of these academics, I'm already actively debunking it, usually with a completely intellectual, reasonable response that they haven't even considered. If they are academics, why aren't their perceptions this quick? As I said, I could write a book on debunking everything they say. But GGD would be bored by having to read it all if I put it here. They, ironically, display behaviours that I often pick apart that they don't seem to realise either.

#7 - I'm referring to the fact that I was learning about American racism situations in the current age when other students were only learning about WW2 history at most (yeah, state school history lessons are extremely limited here) and certainly nothing about America. My education was extremely British based, as it is in most British schools. Things might have changed now, but I'm talking of a standpoint up until 2007. I'm saying that I was one of the few people in my area that were actually taught about this stuff, so I've had a leg up on it from an early age, before I even had a computer to do research. That's all I'm saying.

I don't have any educational, institutional background on the subject that was taught to me but I've been self-teaching these last few years however I can. I believe prejudice takes all forms - it's an umbrella term for all kinds of hate for no reason, one of which is racism. The words racism and prejudice are sometimes used in the same way, with the same weight, after all. I know about power structures and institutional discrimination but I'm saying that the level of it is nowhere near as bad as its made out to be, particularly on a worldwide level. There are actually systems in place to eradicate it wherever possible. This is the same world where a racism allegation will be taken seriously by a sexist allegation won't, despite both being equally bad. Racism manifests in all different ways but they also overlap and the same kind of racism is distributed to different races, all coming from the same place. I totally get what you're saying about how racism is upheld by society's power structures but don't try to tell me that all white countries are build on white supremacy. These countries would look very different if that they were case. "White" countries are the most multiracial and multicultural in the world because we encourage immigration in white countries - not something white supremacy would want. I think when I discussed previously how a white person can have a serious hate crime committed against them by a black person, yet it will not be filed as a hate crime tells you that racism against whites is real because it's not treated as seriously when it happens to a white person. Even when the case is judged by other whites. Surely, if society were white supremacist, the law would dictate that that any minority who brought harm to a white person would have a punishment of the highest order, no room for second chances?

I know you're white, so it annoys me that you can't attempt to relate to me as another (non-racist) white person. Why can't you have the same relatability levels that minorities have for one another? Also, surely, as a white person, you've encountered a time when you've been called racist when you're not or experienced the same unjust treatment that a minority has? Is there really nothing that I say that you agree with or think I have a point about?

I'm very sorry to hear that you struggle to discuss things with me. I always aim to be gentle and respectful wherever possible and never make the people I converse with feel uncomfortable. I really don't know how people can have such negative perceptions of me when I aim to do all this. There's not much more I can say.

See, I think the American definition of colourblindness is not gelling with the British one. In regards to colourblindness, I was meaning that I don't think it's respectful or accurate to look at someone and conjure up a story about them that might not be true. As a woman, I want men to look at me as an equal and I don't want them to see me as a victim. I don't want a man to look at me and imagine all the pain I might have gone through as a woman because he might be assigning pity to me for something that hasn't happened. I don't mind genuine sympathy for something bad that has been known to have happened to me, but treating me with kid gloves regardless of my situation because I'm a woman is not what I want. I want equal treatment, not special treatment. I apply this same theory to other races. I treat other people as I wish to be treated.

See, I think the American definition of colourblindess just doesn't gel with the British one or anyone who actually adovcates for colourblindess. You've got it all wrong and have jumped to crazy conclusions. I don't believe that "whiteness" is a state of being, nor is any other race. It's these toxic concepts to divide people that come from America that I despise. I don't have a default colour, nor do I think white is the default. When I say I try not to see colour, I mean that I take it in but don't react in any negative way because of it. I can't help it if I genuinely don't see colour. I've sometimes seen people of other races and didn't even realise I got their race wrong. I didn't think they were white, just not the race I thought they were. I want everyone to celebrate their uniqueness and everyone is entitled to bask in their own culture. Colourblindness allows for all cultures to be appreciated by all without need for segregation. Colourblindness is about only bringing up race when it needs to be brought up, it is not the overriding topic for which all conversations with a minority must revolve around. Race is a superificial thing that shouldn't have defined us, but it has, so colourblindness attempts to see the basic humanity in people without bringing race into the equation. Colourblindness will drop when it needs to, but in day-to-day life, there is no need to for race to be at the forefront of your thought when having an experience with a minority. Colourblindness does not assume everyone has the same experience (that's ironically what's foisted upon white people, but ok), it allows us to have relations with minorities without stereotyping who they are based on their skin colour. We find out who a person truly is and what their experiences are by talking to them and asking them questions, not by assuming things based on skin colour. Colourblindness isn't about making whites superior, nor is it about pretending that someone is white. It's about treating everyone as a racially neutral entity that we talk to in order to find out more about them that isn't based on stereotypes. Again, we see colour when we have to see it. I am more than happy to discuss uncomfortable realities, as I'm doing now. That doesn't translate into "only realities that are uncomfortable for white people" either. And colourblindness was brought in to eliminate racism, injustice and oppression because if people hadn't made skin colour a big deal back in the day, we wouldn't be where we are now.

This has made me wonder if it's time to change the term. Not only is it technically inaccurate because colourblindness advocates all admit that they do actually see colour, they just don't have negative reactions based on it. But they do see colour. And colourblindness detractors can't understand what me mean and completely misread our intentions. Problem is, I can't come up with a new name and spread it all by myself. But talking about this topic in particular and all the negativity you have piled on me because of it has made me really emotional and I want something to change. I'm not your poster girl for the average white woman (the perception of whom isn't even based on my continent). You'd have to meet me in real life to see I'm not the image you envisage of me at all.

I already said that I jumped to all different segments of the video to get an overall perception. I've heard everything that she's said before. She might have been the first to come up with it, but its been regurgitated by others that I've heard many times. And again, I do understand the terminology, I have come across it many times. Just because I'm a critic of it doesn't mean that I don't understand it. It's because I understand it that I disagree with it. No, I do know what she's going to say, not only because I looked up other, shorter videos of her making a condensed form of her speech here but also because I've heard all this from others, just in different words. These people just regurgitate the same stuff over and over. There's nothing new to see here. At least I've actually heard new and interesting rebuttals to these theories from the opposition. I myself am always coming up with new ways to critique the matter of race but with the SJW side, it's just the same old points repeated. I know you may find it harsh, but I'm entitled to my opinion.

I hope you still reply to all this, even if it's not as long. I just put so much time and effort into this that I don't want it to go to waste. I really don't like it when I spend hours (literally) writing this and then no one replies. At least try, even if you have to condense it down to the extreme.

September 17, 2017

Omg how do y'all make these replies so long?

September 18, 2017

17 hours ago, StrawberryBlond said:

The child is still having the experience of a noose put around their neck and they'll see the result later on. And the black child had to watch this as well. I know such an experience would do harm to me as a child.

I'm talking about the specific articles you send me in your original post, not the ones you have just gone to on to explain. But nevertheless...

I have watched many incarnations of the doll experiment and can conclude that the makers of this really didn't understand how children work. Children, when presented with 2 options, especially by an adult (who they've been taught to respect), tend to pick one of them, even when they don't agree with either (though the study has never included the children who couldn't choose, ran away and cried). I know if I were asked these questions at that age, I wouldn't be able to choose but would feel pressured to because you can't defy an adult by denying the options they've presented to you. And when pressured, children tend to go for the "safe" option, namely the one that's the most common to them. As there are more white dolls in American society than black dolls, they likely think these dolls are more normal, hence "good." Children are still working out the true significance of good and bad at this age, and both words can mean different things, coming from different people, in different situations. There doesn't need to be anything evil behind that, it's just a basic, child reaction to a world that they are still trying to work out. When they say the black dolls are bad because of reasons like "he hits other people," you can tell that is a direct projection of a way that they once saw a black child misbehaving. As an adult, we'd know not to associate every display of blackness with one negative experience, but a child hasn't grasped this concept yet, but in most cases, it will come. You know that any white child who said the white doll was bad for the same reason wouldn't have batted an eyelid. Because hating on your own race when you're white is seem as normal, healthy, because let's face it, a lot of white people are evil, right? No one would think that child was self-hating and had to be re-programmed to love themselves, right? Also, it's natural for children to pick the doll that looks like them, that's the whole reason why multi-racial dolls were created - so children in a growing multi-cultural America could experience the same self-love that white children feel. These studies were mostly edited to show only the reactions the makers wanted you to see (plenty of black children did pick the black doll, but these choices are skimmed over). We don't even know for a fact if all these children genuinely made these decisions or if they were forced to, to set an agenda. Judging by how uncomfortable some of them look, I wouldn't be surprised. I'd also like to add that most of these dolls are really ugly and scary. That's why the children never seem particularly drawn to either of them. Black baby dolls look nothing like real black babies. Black babies look adorable, perhaps the most beautiful babies I've ever seen. I've seen countless white people cooing over black babies and children. But black baby dolls and any kind of baby doll, freak me and a lot of people out, with their overly huge, googly eyes and their creepy little hands. This is why I'd be completely lost as to what to choose at that age. I see one kid was brave enough to say "neither" but most kids would not believe that they have that option. Try giving them real black children, instead of dolls. Then we might get a more accurate picture.

As for the swing experiment, both pictures look exactly the same to me, just races reversed. Both look like they just fell off the swing or are even sitting on the ground, with a weird looking starey kid behind them. Same with the books. I actually think, in both cases, it looks like the person on foot looks like they're attempting to help them. There's no "right" way to interpret these things. A lot of things can be percieved totally differently and the other person can't work out why. I once drew something head-on and others assumed it was a birdseye view. I've had to look at paused images over and over to see a shape that other people can see that I can't see. They actually get annoyed when you can't see it and refuse to believe it might just all be in their mind! My views towards "innocent and guilty party" studies have always differed depending on facial expression, body language, etc. You know, intellectual, psychological analysis. Are there people who automatically demonise POC in all these situations? Absolutely. But there can be multiple reasons for why people make the choice they make, there doesn't always have to be a sinister reason behind it.

Again, the prison example is a bit over-complicated and that's what yields results like this. There's no way of proving that everyone who said that the punishment should be harsher on the altered black statistics, they were just unlucky enough to be in the group who were presented with this, so they look racist, when in actual fact, some of them just might have severe views on drug laws, regardless of race involved. Sometimes, it would help if the question holders were just honest about what they were doing. Just overtly ask: "Do you think black criminals should have more severe sentencing than white criminals?" I know you might say that people never respond honestly when it's this direct but seriously, racists don't give a damn about showing their true feelings when it comes to the subject of crime, in particular. That's one topic where they seem to feel no need to hide. Most racists know what they're doing is bad, but they don't care. They don't take an accusation of racism as offensive, they just take it as a non-contentious statement of fact.

Understand that these are American studies and therefore, perception of race will be different compared to worldwide. There is nowhere near the level of anti-black sentiment in the UK than there is in America because racial situations were never as bad over here. Even Americans who didn't believe in everything I said agreed with me on this one. So, I just can't relate to studies saying that black children are seen as consistently older and less innocent. In my culture, we just aren't like this. White people are different all over the world and the whole world does not follow American racial perceptions.

Now, I really can't argue much regarding the crime statistics when it comes to rates of being pulled over, stop and search, racial profiling, etc. I've never denied that's a problem. However, I think it's a sign that crime is so rampant in these communities that it's come to this. The bad people in non-white races have made it hard for the good ones. When they only make up a small percentage of the population but so many of this small percentage is causing disproportionate levels of crime, it's going to have a knock-on effect on everyone in the race, including the law-abiding ones. I think non-white communities need to re-evaluate how they are raising their children, what culture they're glorifying to them and what expectations they are placing on them. White communities are already encouraged to do this, to tame our unruly children. When children are raised with boundaries, consume approved media, are taught respect by their parents and are raised to aim high in life and achieve anything they want, they are far less likely to turn to criminality. I watched an episode of World's Strictest Parents where 2 badly-behaved teenagers in the UK were sent to live with a black family in Atlanta. This family were rich, they lived in a house and a neighbourhood these kids could only dream of. They were pastors and owned their own church. They raised their sons to be moral, respectful and hardworking. They sent them to a private Christian academy (although not stated, it was clearly a black school, as the UK guests were the only white ones there and even all the teachers were black). These black schoolchildren were so well-behaved and aimed to be teachers, lawyers, doctors, a world away from the expectations these white British kids were under. It just goes to show that being raised in a good environment, with a strict but loving parents who are attentive and responsible, can be fundamental in where a child will end up in life, regardless of race. Also, plenty of poor black children grow up to be contributing members of society - being poor is not always an excuse and I've actually heard black people who came from this set-up say that they too hate this excuse.

#1 - I'm meaning that the concept of race and racism isn't hard to understand. WE all have varying degrees of melanin in us, some more than others, and those varying degrees are what race is. And while some of us are ok with this, others see it as a problem that must lead to separation and punishment and that's what racism is. Not hard to figure out. I know I'm just talking about in the most basic of ways, but that was the whole point, I was just taking it down to the root.

#2 - Here we go again with the "bigotry and prejudice can exist against whites but not racism" fallacy. People who say this either haven't had it happen to them/haven't examined real cases on hate crimes against whites. It's hard to believe there's no racism against whites when...white BLM protesters are attacked by fellow black BLM supporters, a white woman is attacked by a black woman on a bus for no reason, when a white kid is chased home by black kids who douse him in lighter fluid and tell him "white boy, this is what you deserve," when a disabled white man is captured by a group of black youths who assault him and chant racist abuse at him, when a white woman is raped by a black man who shouted racist abuse at her throughout and when a white couple are carjacked by a group of black people who take them back to their house, rape and torture them, shoot the guy multiple times to death on the train tracks and then bind the woman, pour a chemical substance down her throat and on her body and leave her to suffocate in a trashcan. In most of these cases, hate crime charges were not filed and were only covered by local news stations, at most. The last instance didn't even make national news and did not result in hate crime charges, despite the severity of it. If these instances are not hate crime, I don't know what is.

#3 - White privilege does exist, but it depends on the situation. For example, if everyone in an area is white, you are no more or less privileged, racially, than everyone else and everyone is on the same level. However, if a black person entered this equation, white privilege would start to become a factor somewhat. But this privilege is not always present in many situations and many white people will clarify to you that it has not helped them be treated any better than people of other races. I can tell you that from experience. I've grown up with many white people being mean to me for no reason in an all-white area (even from a distance, for my natural appearance) and still experience it. Even when being and looking totally innocent, I've had white adults and white authority figures be mean or unfair to me, even demonise me. I've never had any romantic interaction in my life - even white men don't approach me. I've never even had a paid job in my life, no one will hire me, even with my educational background, even when interviewed by whites. When I see Americans go on about this white privilege, I understand it and yes, it's true...but I personally can't relate.

#4 - I do hold biases and I'm not proud of them, but they're not racial ones. The biases that I do have are against certain types of people in my own race, actually, due to bad experiences. But because I've never had any truly bad experiences with minorities, I don't feel the need to hold any bias against them. I actually feel safer around minorities in my country than people of my own race, actually. Why must all white people hold racial biases towards other races? No one is born inherently racist, it's a learned behaviour and I don't remember every encountering any such lesson. Even as a child, I questioned exclusion or ill treatment of any kind.

#5 - Yes...being taught to treat everyone the same makes you likely to grow into a racist now? This is how warped society is, when even the best life lessons are being twisted to be sinister when a white person says them.

#6 - I haven't made a rebuttal because there's too much to fit into one post. I'd have to do it every couple of seconds, which doesn't bode well for a 1 hour video. I don't mean to sound pompous, but these academics sound as if they haven't experienced very much life outside their comfort zone, as if they're ignorant to any exceptions to the rule, any other way of being. They have a set image of a white person in their head and believe us all to be roughly the same, bringing no thought for culture, upbringing, etc. to the table, just their limited American viewpoint. I also think they can't do a lot of self-analysis. Part of the reason I take so long to write replies is because I think stuff out, let it hold for a while, try to break it down as if I was the opposer, in order to test its capability. And sometimes that's when I realise it's a rubbish idea and dispose of it. That's why I'm so confident in my beliefs - I've tried and tested them by being my own worst critic. But within 30 seconds or so of a theory being presented to me by one of these academics, I'm already actively debunking it, usually with a completely intellectual, reasonable response that they haven't even considered. If they are academics, why aren't their perceptions this quick? As I said, I could write a book on debunking everything they say. But GGD would be bored by having to read it all if I put it here. They, ironically, display behaviours that I often pick apart that they don't seem to realise either.

#7 - I'm referring to the fact that I was learning about American racism situations in the current age when other students were only learning about WW2 history at most (yeah, state school history lessons are extremely limited here) and certainly nothing about America. My education was extremely British based, as it is in most British schools. Things might have changed now, but I'm talking of a standpoint up until 2007. I'm saying that I was one of the few people in my area that were actually taught about this stuff, so I've had a leg up on it from an early age, before I even had a computer to do research. That's all I'm saying.

I don't have any educational, institutional background on the subject that was taught to me but I've been self-teaching these last few years however I can. I believe prejudice takes all forms - it's an umbrella term for all kinds of hate for no reason, one of which is racism. The words racism and prejudice are sometimes used in the same way, with the same weight, after all. I know about power structures and institutional discrimination but I'm saying that the level of it is nowhere near as bad as its made out to be, particularly on a worldwide level. There are actually systems in place to eradicate it wherever possible. This is the same world where a racism allegation will be taken seriously by a sexist allegation won't, despite both being equally bad. Racism manifests in all different ways but they also overlap and the same kind of racism is distributed to different races, all coming from the same place. I totally get what you're saying about how racism is upheld by society's power structures but don't try to tell me that all white countries are build on white supremacy. These countries would look very different if that they were case. "White" countries are the most multiracial and multicultural in the world because we encourage immigration in white countries - not something white supremacy would want. I think when I discussed previously how a white person can have a serious hate crime committed against them by a black person, yet it will not be filed as a hate crime tells you that racism against whites is real because it's not treated as seriously when it happens to a white person. Even when the case is judged by other whites. Surely, if society were white supremacist, the law would dictate that that any minority who brought harm to a white person would have a punishment of the highest order, no room for second chances?

I know you're white, so it annoys me that you can't attempt to relate to me as another (non-racist) white person. Why can't you have the same relatability levels that minorities have for one another? Also, surely, as a white person, you've encountered a time when you've been called racist when you're not or experienced the same unjust treatment that a minority has? Is there really nothing that I say that you agree with or think I have a point about?

I'm very sorry to hear that you struggle to discuss things with me. I always aim to be gentle and respectful wherever possible and never make the people I converse with feel uncomfortable. I really don't know how people can have such negative perceptions of me when I aim to do all this. There's not much more I can say.

See, I think the American definition of colourblindness is not gelling with the British one. In regards to colourblindness, I was meaning that I don't think it's respectful or accurate to look at someone and conjure up a story about them that might not be true. As a woman, I want men to look at me as an equal and I don't want them to see me as a victim. I don't want a man to look at me and imagine all the pain I might have gone through as a woman because he might be assigning pity to me for something that hasn't happened. I don't mind genuine sympathy for something bad that has been known to have happened to me, but treating me with kid gloves regardless of my situation because I'm a woman is not what I want. I want equal treatment, not special treatment. I apply this same theory to other races. I treat other people as I wish to be treated.

See, I think the American definition of colourblindess just doesn't gel with the British one or anyone who actually adovcates for colourblindess. You've got it all wrong and have jumped to crazy conclusions. I don't believe that "whiteness" is a state of being, nor is any other race. It's these toxic concepts to divide people that come from America that I despise. I don't have a default colour, nor do I think white is the default. When I say I try not to see colour, I mean that I take it in but don't react in any negative way because of it. I can't help it if I genuinely don't see colour. I've sometimes seen people of other races and didn't even realise I got their race wrong. I didn't think they were white, just not the race I thought they were. I want everyone to celebrate their uniqueness and everyone is entitled to bask in their own culture. Colourblindness allows for all cultures to be appreciated by all without need for segregation. Colourblindness is about only bringing up race when it needs to be brought up, it is not the overriding topic for which all conversations with a minority must revolve around. Race is a superificial thing that shouldn't have defined us, but it has, so colourblindness attempts to see the basic humanity in people without bringing race into the equation. Colourblindness will drop when it needs to, but in day-to-day life, there is no need to for race to be at the forefront of your thought when having an experience with a minority. Colourblindness does not assume everyone has the same experience (that's ironically what's foisted upon white people, but ok), it allows us to have relations with minorities without stereotyping who they are based on their skin colour. We find out who a person truly is and what their experiences are by talking to them and asking them questions, not by assuming things based on skin colour. Colourblindness isn't about making whites superior, nor is it about pretending that someone is white. It's about treating everyone as a racially neutral entity that we talk to in order to find out more about them that isn't based on stereotypes. Again, we see colour when we have to see it. I am more than happy to discuss uncomfortable realities, as I'm doing now. That doesn't translate into "only realities that are uncomfortable for white people" either. And colourblindness was brought in to eliminate racism, injustice and oppression because if people hadn't made skin colour a big deal back in the day, we wouldn't be where we are now.

This has made me wonder if it's time to change the term. Not only is it technically inaccurate because colourblindness advocates all admit that they do actually see colour, they just don't have negative reactions based on it. But they do see colour. And colourblindness detractors can't understand what me mean and completely misread our intentions. Problem is, I can't come up with a new name and spread it all by myself. But talking about this topic in particular and all the negativity you have piled on me because of it has made me really emotional and I want something to change. I'm not your poster girl for the average white woman (the perception of whom isn't even based on my continent). You'd have to meet me in real life to see I'm not the image you envisage of me at all.

I already said that I jumped to all different segments of the video to get an overall perception. I've heard everything that she's said before. She might have been the first to come up with it, but its been regurgitated by others that I've heard many times. And again, I do understand the terminology, I have come across it many times. Just because I'm a critic of it doesn't mean that I don't understand it. It's because I understand it that I disagree with it. No, I do know what she's going to say, not only because I looked up other, shorter videos of her making a condensed form of her speech here but also because I've heard all this from others, just in different words. These people just regurgitate the same stuff over and over. There's nothing new to see here. At least I've actually heard new and interesting rebuttals to these theories from the opposition. I myself am always coming up with new ways to critique the matter of race but with the SJW side, it's just the same old points repeated. I know you may find it harsh, but I'm entitled to my opinion.

I hope you still reply to all this, even if it's not as long. I just put so much time and effort into this that I don't want it to go to waste. I really don't like it when I spend hours (literally) writing this and then no one replies. At least try, even if you have to condense it down to the extreme.

"Children, when presented with 2 options, especially by an adult (who they've been taught to respect), tend to pick one of them, even when they don't agree with either"

But the one they end up picking is relevant in terms of how we see race. The answers they give as to why the white doll is good and the black doll is bad is relevant to how we see race.

"As there are more white dolls in American society than black dolls, they likely think these dolls are more normal, hence "good.""

That's not how they replied when asked They made specific claims about black skin being ugly. They don't think the "nice" doll is nice because there are more white dolls

"When they say the black dolls are bad because of reasons like "he hits other people," you can tell that is a direct projection of a way that they once saw a black child misbehaving. As an adult, we'd know not to associate every display of blackness with one negative experience, but a child hasn't grasped this concept yet"

Yes all these children have just seen black kids hitting each other and white children perfectly behaved. That's the ticket. Everytime this study is replicated what it's actually showing is that these children have all seen instances of black children misbehave and no instances of white children misbehaving.

We are taught racism from an early age - not just through our parents but through the society in which we live. These kids would have been told to treat everyone the same and they no doubt try their hardest, but they know there is a difference between white people and black people. They know there is a difference in how they are treated.

"You know that any white child who said the white doll was bad for the same reason wouldn't have batted an eyelid. Because hating on your own race when you're white is seem as normal, healthy, because let's face it, a lot of white people are evil, right?"

No that's total ****. The fact is that wasn't the response of white children... It's not healthy for white people to hate themselves and white people are not 'evil'. This defensiveness and persecution complex when confronted with the facts about race and privilege is exactly what makes these conversations difficult.

"As for the swing experiment, both pictures look exactly the same to me, just races reversed."

Uhhh Yep. That's the point. It was designed for children and they are designed to be unclear, they are designed so that people can interpret what they want from those pictures. Overwhelmingly when they ask the kids what happened, they respond in ways like "The black kid pushed the white kid over" and "The black kid fell over and the white kid helped". Both the same image, both can be interpreted in either way, but the studies show overwhelming racial bias in how the image is viewed.

"Again, the prison example is a bit over-complicated and that's what yields results like this. There's no way of proving that everyone who said that the punishment should be harsher on the altered black statistics, they were just unlucky enough to be in the group who were presented with this, so they look racist, when in actual fact, some of them just might have severe views on drug laws, regardless of race involved."

Err... This is how studies are performed... You can't have one group and show them both...
The study isn't trying to prove anything about every member of the group...

You just don't go from over 50% enthusiastically wanting to sign the petition to under 28% of them wanting to sign the petition.... What was different about those two groups again?? 22+ difference isn't just because of some miracle freak accident where all those in the second group had more severe views on drug laws... As I said anyway, The outcome was as true for participants who said the law was too harsh as it was for those who said it wasn’t harsh enough.

" Sometimes, it would help if the question holders were just honest about what they were doing. Just overtly ask: "Do you think black criminals should have more severe sentencing than white criminals?" I know you might say that people never respond honestly when it's this direct but seriously, racists don't give a damn about showing their true feelings when it comes to the subject of crime, in particular."

This is again you not understanding what racism is, and not having an idea about the mechanisms of racism. You have this picture in your head about what a racist looks like - they're old, stubborn, they are mean and callous. The fact is all white people are racist. All white people actively work to maintain the status quo...

The study is designed to detect people's hidden biases. As shown time and time again, there are a wealth of white people who think they have 0 hidden racial biases, but when tested of course they do - because they have grown up in a country built upon white supremacy and have been socialised to think about race in certain ways. People don't say how they feel, some people don't realise they feel differently. This stuff isn't conscious.

"There is nowhere near the level of anti-black sentiment in the UK than there is in America... So, I just can't relate to studies saying that black children are seen as consistently older and less innocent. In my culture, we just aren't like this."

Unfortunately for you the similar experiments in your country show otherwise. The dolls experiment, the pictures experiment. When it comes to the justice system it's actually a lot worse. Black prisoners make up 15% of the prisoner population and this compares with 2.2% of the general population – there is greater disproportionality in the number of black people in prisons in the UK than there is in the United States.

For every 100 white women handed custodial sentences at crown courts for drug offences, 227 black women were given prison terms.

When given the Implicit Association Test (IAT) white British people still overwhelmingly show bias in favour of white people and against black people.

"Now, I really can't argue much regarding the crime statistics when it comes to rates of being pulled over, stop and search, racial profiling, etc. I've never denied that's a problem. However, I think it's a sign that crime is so rampant in these communities that it's come to this. The bad people in non-white races have made it hard for the good ones. "

Then you would be wrong... We know, through studies, that white people and black people take drugs at similar rates for example, yet black people are convicted for drug charges at a far higher rate. Again 'these communities' are often majority white....

When you talk about "the good ones" and "the bad ones" I'm sorry but it's another jaw dropping moment...

"I think non-white communities need to re-evaluate how they are raising their children, what culture they're glorifying to them and what expectations they are placing on them. White communities are already encouraged to do this, to tame our unruly children. "

Do you like... Ever read what you write? Like how can you say stuff like this and then later on be like 'I definitely have no racial bias! No sir!"

" I'm meaning that the concept of race and racism isn't hard to understand. WE all have varying degrees of melanin in us, some more than others, and those varying degrees are what race is. And while some of us are ok with this, others see it as a problem that must lead to separation and punishment and that's what racism is"

Noo! That's not what racism is! That's a super simplistic understanding of the extremely complex (not simple) concepts of race and racism! Racism requires a balance of power, it requires systems and institutions. What you are describing is PREJUDICE. Something every human alive has.

"Here we go again with the "bigotry and prejudice can exist against whites but not racism" fallacy. People who say this either haven't had it happen to them/haven't examined real cases on hate crimes against whites. It's hard to believe there's no racism against whites when...white BLM protesters are attacked by fellow black BLM supporters, a white woman is attacked by a black woman on a bus for no reason, when a white kid is chased home by black kids who douse him in lighter fluid and tell him "white boy, this is what you deserve,""

Once again YOU ARE PROVIDING EXAMPLES OF ANTI-WHITE PREJUDICE AND BIGOTRY! Not of racism!! You don't understand the terminology we are using!! Please explain to me how any of those examples are directly linked to forms of institutional power that actively work to uphold the 'black supremacy' imbedded in the U.S or U.K.... Yes white people can be the victims of hate crimes but that =/= racism.

" if everyone in an area is white, you are no more or less privileged, racially, than everyone else and everyone is on the same level. However, if a black person entered this equation, white privilege would start to become a factor somewhat."

Not quite... You ignore that due to racial privilege you probably live in a nicer area, that resources are more likely to be distributed to your area.... So on so forth.

"I can tell you that from experience. I've grown up with many white people being mean to me for no reason in an all-white area (even from a distance, for my natural appearance) and still experience it. Even when being and looking totally innocent, I've had white adults and white authority figures be mean or unfair to me, even demonise me. I've never had any romantic interaction in my life - even white men don't approach me. I've never even had a paid job in my life, no one will hire me, even with my educational background, even when interviewed by whites. When I see Americans go on about this white privilege, I understand it and yes, it's true...but I personally can't relate."

The things you describe have nothing to do with the concept of white privilege though... All of that can be true and it doesn't have any bearing on whether you have white privilege.. Also I'm not American... I'm Australian.

"I do hold biases and I'm not proud of them, but they're not racial ones"

You wouldn't know You wouldn't be aware of them You can't just say that.

"No one is born inherently racist, it's a learned behaviour and I don't remember every encountering any such lesson. Even as a child, I questioned exclusion or ill treatment of any kind."

No, we aren't born racist, but we are born into a racist society. You weren't explicitly told to be racist, nobody ever sat you down and explained that white people are superior. You learned racism through the media, through politics, through segregation, through living in a society where white people and black people are seen as, and treated, differently.

"Yes...being taught to treat everyone the same makes you likely to grow into a racist now? This is how warped society is, when even the best life lessons are being twisted to be sinister when a white person says them."

No... It's just not something that your parents can teach you. You were told to treat people equally. You weren't taught to treat people equally. There is a difference.Again, this was explained very well in the video I provided.

"But within 30 seconds or so of a theory being presented to me by one of these academics, I'm already actively debunking it, usually with a completely intellectual, reasonable response that they haven't even considered. If they are academics, why aren't their perceptions this quick?"

Yes, it's a great sign that you can 'debunk' a theory within 30 seconds People who have spent their adult lives researching this topic, who have drawn upon study after study. You debunking it in 30 seconds isn't evidence of any cognitive dissonance, it isn't an example of white fragility, it's proof that you know this topic inside out and fully comprehend the issues!

"I totally get what you're saying about how racism is upheld by society's power structures but don't try to tell me that all white countries are build on white supremacy. These countries would look very different if that they were case. "White" countries are the most multiracial and multicultural in the world because we encourage immigration in white countries - not something white supremacy would want. I think when I discussed previously how a white person can have a serious hate crime committed against them by a black person, yet it will not be filed as a hate crime tells you that racism against whites is real because it's not treated as seriously when it happens to a white person. Even when the case is judged by other whites. Surely, if society were white supremacist, the law would dictate that that any minority who brought harm to a white person would have a punishment of the highest order, no room for second chances?"

A country built on white supremacy =/= a country that only allows whites, it doesn't mean it's a country where no white person can face prejudice, it doesn't mean a country that has laws that dictate any minority who has brought harm against a white person would be punished to the 'highest order' with no room for second chances. That's such a silly, simplistic view of how things work.

You're a feminist, you believe in the patriarchy and in institutional patriarchal structures. That doesn't mean we live in a society where we create laws that disallow women from working, where we have arranged marriages, where women are not allowed to vote. If I told you we don't live in countries built within a patriarchal system and don't live in a country that operates under a patriarchy you would, hopefully, roll your eyes at me for having such a simplistic understanding of how the patriarchy operates in modern society.

A society that views white people as more intelligent, competent, trustworthy, and reliable, a society with a justice system that is disproportionately punitive towards black people, a society that in which resources are unequally distributed towards whiter areas, a society that depicts european beauty as the standard, in which the life expectancy for people of colour is lower, in which people of colour are systematically over-policed (in terms of unjust harassment and unlawful arrest and brutalization), in which people of colour are underrepresented in leadership positions and so on - is a society that operates under white supremacy.

"I know you're white, so it annoys me that you can't attempt to relate to me as another (non-racist) white person."

I can relate to you just fine, but you are a racist person... White people are racist, we are taught that, there is no way to be un-racist... That's not to say you are evil, it's not to say that you are a terrible person, it's not to say that you are explicitly bigoted - but you have a certain concept of what 'racism' is and what 'racism' means so you think that because you try your hardest to treat people equally, because your parents told you to treat people equally, because you questioned explicit 'exclusion or ill treatment of any kind' you can't be racist... Again, I think that's why it would be helpful to watch the video I provided. You can't just skip through this stuff, dismiss it within 30 seconds and then act as if your arguments are well reasoned and that you fully understand the 'simple' topic of race and racism.

"Why can't you have the same relatability levels that minorities have for one another? Also, surely, as a white person, you've encountered a time when you've been called racist when you're not or experienced the same unjust treatment that a minority has? Is there really nothing that I say that you agree with or think I have a point about?"

Yes, I've been called a racist before - I've felt strongly that I'm not, i've gone into defensive mode, I've experienced 'white fragility' and then I learned more. Yes I've experienced unjust treatment. No there really is nothing I agree with you on, I really don't think you've made a strong point about anything to be totally honest... I think during this entire conversation your response has been defensiveness and you have attempted to either ignore or just explain away clear cut examples of racism.

"I really don't know how people can have such negative perceptions of me when I aim to do all this. There's not much more I can say."

Because, it is impossible to have these conversations with you. They go nowhere. You refuse to even entertain the thought that you might hold racial biases - it's just impossible for you to even conceive that you might and you approach these discussions with such cognitive dissonance and defensiveness.

"See, I think the American definition of colourblindess just doesn't gel with the British one or anyone who actually adovcates for colourblindess. You've got it all wrong and have jumped to crazy conclusions."

"When I say I try not to see colour, I mean that I take it in but don't react in any negative way because of it. I can't help it if I genuinely don't see colour. I've sometimes seen people of other races and didn't even realise I got their race wrong."

That's not true though. You do genuinely see colour. You do treat people differently because of it. People treat people differently. You just refuse to see it or acknowledge it because you are wearing these colour blind goggles.

"And colourblindness was brought in to eliminate racism, injustice and oppression because if people hadn't made skin colour a big deal back in the day, we wouldn't be where we are now."

But it doesn't eliminate racism, injustice and oppression - it ignores it. Yes, people 'back in the day' made a big deal about skin colour and that history informs our present. When you say 'I don't see colour' what you say is 'I see everyone as if they are white'.

I'm not 'gender blind' If I saw you I would notice you are a woman, you would notice I am a man. There is nothing wrong with that. It doesn't mean I'm imagining all the pain you went through and assigning pitty. You wouldn't enjoy it if I walked up to you and said 'I don't see gender' or 'I don't see you as a man or woman'. That does nothing, it doesn't help. I do see you as a woman and you see me as a man. That influences the way we interact with each other - pretending we don't see gender doesn't help us treat each other the same - it just ignores the fact that we notice difference and act differently.

"I already said that I jumped to all different segments of the video to get an overall perception. I've heard everything that she's said before. She might have been the first to come up with it, but its been regurgitated by others that I've heard many times. And again, I do understand the terminology, I have come across it many times."

Yes, you jumped through the video and (by your own account) dismissed any points made within 30 seconds. You don't understand the terminology... That's super clear. It's not that you just have a genuine criticism - it's that you are consistently equating racism with prejudice and bigotry... You point out instances of anti-white prejudice and bigotry and call that racism... That's not what racism is... If you understood what racism was you would be trying to place that anti-white prejudice and bigotry into a historical, cultural, societal context and explaining how it's linked...

September 18, 2017

7 hours ago, Morphine Prince said:

Omg how do y'all make these replies so long?

Take the time to read Bebe's last two comments. You won't be sorry!

September 18, 2017

Ohh it's okay cuz he is not white and cuz he's rapper ofc!

September 18, 2017

18 hours ago, Bebe said:

"Children, when presented with 2 options, especially by an adult (who they've been taught to respect), tend to pick one of them, even when they don't agree with either"

But the one they end up picking is relevant in terms of how we see race. The answers they give as to why the white doll is good and the black doll is bad is relevant to how we see race.

"As there are more white dolls in American society than black dolls, they likely think these dolls are more normal, hence "good.""

That's not how they replied when asked They made specific claims about black skin being ugly. They don't think the "nice" doll is nice because there are more white dolls

"When they say the black dolls are bad because of reasons like "he hits other people," you can tell that is a direct projection of a way that they once saw a black child misbehaving. As an adult, we'd know not to associate every display of blackness with one negative experience, but a child hasn't grasped this concept yet"

Yes all these children have just seen black kids hitting each other and white children perfectly behaved. That's the ticket. Everytime this study is replicated what it's actually showing is that these children have all seen instances of black children misbehave and no instances of white children misbehaving.

We are taught racism from an early age - not just through our parents but through the society in which we live. These kids would have been told to treat everyone the same and they no doubt try their hardest, but they know there is a difference between white people and black people. They know there is a difference in how they are treated.

"You know that any white child who said the white doll was bad for the same reason wouldn't have batted an eyelid. Because hating on your own race when you're white is seem as normal, healthy, because let's face it, a lot of white people are evil, right?"

No that's total ****. The fact is that wasn't the response of white children... It's not healthy for white people to hate themselves and white people are not 'evil'. This defensiveness and persecution complex when confronted with the facts about race and privilege is exactly what makes these conversations difficult.

"As for the swing experiment, both pictures look exactly the same to me, just races reversed."

Uhhh Yep. That's the point. It was designed for children and they are designed to be unclear, they are designed so that people can interpret what they want from those pictures. Overwhelmingly when they ask the kids what happened, they respond in ways like "The black kid pushed the white kid over" and "The black kid fell over and the white kid helped". Both the same image, both can be interpreted in either way, but the studies show overwhelming racial bias in how the image is viewed.

"Again, the prison example is a bit over-complicated and that's what yields results like this. There's no way of proving that everyone who said that the punishment should be harsher on the altered black statistics, they were just unlucky enough to be in the group who were presented with this, so they look racist, when in actual fact, some of them just might have severe views on drug laws, regardless of race involved."

Err... This is how studies are performed... You can't have one group and show them both...
The study isn't trying to prove anything about every member of the group...

You just don't go from over 50% enthusiastically wanting to sign the petition to under 28% of them wanting to sign the petition.... What was different about those two groups again?? 22+ difference isn't just because of some miracle freak accident where all those in the second group had more severe views on drug laws... As I said anyway, The outcome was as true for participants who said the law was too harsh as it was for those who said it wasn’t harsh enough.

" Sometimes, it would help if the question holders were just honest about what they were doing. Just overtly ask: "Do you think black criminals should have more severe sentencing than white criminals?" I know you might say that people never respond honestly when it's this direct but seriously, racists don't give a damn about showing their true feelings when it comes to the subject of crime, in particular."

This is again you not understanding what racism is, and not having an idea about the mechanisms of racism. You have this picture in your head about what a racist looks like - they're old, stubborn, they are mean and callous. The fact is all white people are racist. All white people actively work to maintain the status quo...

The study is designed to detect people's hidden biases. As shown time and time again, there are a wealth of white people who think they have 0 hidden racial biases, but when tested of course they do - because they have grown up in a country built upon white supremacy and have been socialised to think about race in certain ways. People don't say how they feel, some people don't realise they feel differently. This stuff isn't conscious.

"There is nowhere near the level of anti-black sentiment in the UK than there is in America... So, I just can't relate to studies saying that black children are seen as consistently older and less innocent. In my culture, we just aren't like this."

Unfortunately for you the similar experiments in your country show otherwise. The dolls experiment, the pictures experiment. When it comes to the justice system it's actually a lot worse. Black prisoners make up 15% of the prisoner population and this compares with 2.2% of the general population – there is greater disproportionality in the number of black people in prisons in the UK than there is in the United States.

For every 100 white women handed custodial sentences at crown courts for drug offences, 227 black women were given prison terms.

When given the Implicit Association Test (IAT) white British people still overwhelmingly show bias in favour of white people and against black people.

"Now, I really can't argue much regarding the crime statistics when it comes to rates of being pulled over, stop and search, racial profiling, etc. I've never denied that's a problem. However, I think it's a sign that crime is so rampant in these communities that it's come to this. The bad people in non-white races have made it hard for the good ones. "

Then you would be wrong... We know, through studies, that white people and black people take drugs at similar rates for example, yet black people are convicted for drug charges at a far higher rate. Again 'these communities' are often majority white....

When you talk about "the good ones" and "the bad ones" I'm sorry but it's another jaw dropping moment...

"I think non-white communities need to re-evaluate how they are raising their children, what culture they're glorifying to them and what expectations they are placing on them. White communities are already encouraged to do this, to tame our unruly children. "

Do you like... Ever read what you write? Like how can you say stuff like this and then later on be like 'I definitely have no racial bias! No sir!"

" I'm meaning that the concept of race and racism isn't hard to understand. WE all have varying degrees of melanin in us, some more than others, and those varying degrees are what race is. And while some of us are ok with this, others see it as a problem that must lead to separation and punishment and that's what racism is"

Noo! That's not what racism is! That's a super simplistic understanding of the extremely complex (not simple) concepts of race and racism! Racism requires a balance of power, it requires systems and institutions. What you are describing is PREJUDICE. Something every human alive has.

"Here we go again with the "bigotry and prejudice can exist against whites but not racism" fallacy. People who say this either haven't had it happen to them/haven't examined real cases on hate crimes against whites. It's hard to believe there's no racism against whites when...white BLM protesters are attacked by fellow black BLM supporters, a white woman is attacked by a black woman on a bus for no reason, when a white kid is chased home by black kids who douse him in lighter fluid and tell him "white boy, this is what you deserve,""

Once again YOU ARE PROVIDING EXAMPLES OF ANTI-WHITE PREJUDICE AND BIGOTRY! Not of racism!! You don't understand the terminology we are using!! Please explain to me how any of those examples are directly linked to forms of institutional power that actively work to uphold the 'black supremacy' imbedded in the U.S or U.K.... Yes white people can be the victims of hate crimes but that =/= racism.

" if everyone in an area is white, you are no more or less privileged, racially, than everyone else and everyone is on the same level. However, if a black person entered this equation, white privilege would start to become a factor somewhat."

Not quite... You ignore that due to racial privilege you probably live in a nicer area, that resources are more likely to be distributed to your area.... So on so forth.

"I can tell you that from experience. I've grown up with many white people being mean to me for no reason in an all-white area (even from a distance, for my natural appearance) and still experience it. Even when being and looking totally innocent, I've had white adults and white authority figures be mean or unfair to me, even demonise me. I've never had any romantic interaction in my life - even white men don't approach me. I've never even had a paid job in my life, no one will hire me, even with my educational background, even when interviewed by whites. When I see Americans go on about this white privilege, I understand it and yes, it's true...but I personally can't relate."

The things you describe have nothing to do with the concept of white privilege though... All of that can be true and it doesn't have any bearing on whether you have white privilege.. Also I'm not American... I'm Australian.

"I do hold biases and I'm not proud of them, but they're not racial ones"

You wouldn't know You wouldn't be aware of them You can't just say that.

"No one is born inherently racist, it's a learned behaviour and I don't remember every encountering any such lesson. Even as a child, I questioned exclusion or ill treatment of any kind."

No, we aren't born racist, but we are born into a racist society. You weren't explicitly told to be racist, nobody ever sat you down and explained that white people are superior. You learned racism through the media, through politics, through segregation, through living in a society where white people and black people are seen as, and treated, differently.

"Yes...being taught to treat everyone the same makes you likely to grow into a racist now? This is how warped society is, when even the best life lessons are being twisted to be sinister when a white person says them."

No... It's just not something that your parents can teach you. You were told to treat people equally. You weren't taught to treat people equally. There is a difference.Again, this was explained very well in the video I provided.

"But within 30 seconds or so of a theory being presented to me by one of these academics, I'm already actively debunking it, usually with a completely intellectual, reasonable response that they haven't even considered. If they are academics, why aren't their perceptions this quick?"

Yes, it's a great sign that you can 'debunk' a theory within 30 seconds People who have spent their adult lives researching this topic, who have drawn upon study after study. You debunking it in 30 seconds isn't evidence of any cognitive dissonance, it isn't an example of white fragility, it's proof that you know this topic inside out and fully comprehend the issues!

"I totally get what you're saying about how racism is upheld by society's power structures but don't try to tell me that all white countries are build on white supremacy. These countries would look very different if that they were case. "White" countries are the most multiracial and multicultural in the world because we encourage immigration in white countries - not something white supremacy would want. I think when I discussed previously how a white person can have a serious hate crime committed against them by a black person, yet it will not be filed as a hate crime tells you that racism against whites is real because it's not treated as seriously when it happens to a white person. Even when the case is judged by other whites. Surely, if society were white supremacist, the law would dictate that that any minority who brought harm to a white person would have a punishment of the highest order, no room for second chances?"

A country built on white supremacy =/= a country that only allows whites, it doesn't mean it's a country where no white person can face prejudice, it doesn't mean a country that has laws that dictate any minority who has brought harm against a white person would be punished to the 'highest order' with no room for second chances. That's such a silly, simplistic view of how things work.

You're a feminist, you believe in the patriarchy and in institutional patriarchal structures. That doesn't mean we live in a society where we create laws that disallow women from working, where we have arranged marriages, where women are not allowed to vote. If I told you we don't live in countries built within a patriarchal system and don't live in a country that operates under a patriarchy you would, hopefully, roll your eyes at me for having such a simplistic understanding of how the patriarchy operates in modern society.

A society that views white people as more intelligent, competent, trustworthy, and reliable, a society with a justice system that is disproportionately punitive towards black people, a society that in which resources are unequally distributed towards whiter areas, a society that depicts european beauty as the standard, in which the life expectancy for people of colour is lower, in which people of colour are systematically over-policed (in terms of unjust harassment and unlawful arrest and brutalization), in which people of colour are underrepresented in leadership positions and so on - is a society that operates under white supremacy.

"I know you're white, so it annoys me that you can't attempt to relate to me as another (non-racist) white person."

I can relate to you just fine, but you are a racist person... White people are racist, we are taught that, there is no way to be un-racist... That's not to say you are evil, it's not to say that you are a terrible person, it's not to say that you are explicitly bigoted - but you have a certain concept of what 'racism' is and what 'racism' means so you think that because you try your hardest to treat people equally, because your parents told you to treat people equally, because you questioned explicit 'exclusion or ill treatment of any kind' you can't be racist... Again, I think that's why it would be helpful to watch the video I provided. You can't just skip through this stuff, dismiss it within 30 seconds and then act as if your arguments are well reasoned and that you fully understand the 'simple' topic of race and racism.

"Why can't you have the same relatability levels that minorities have for one another? Also, surely, as a white person, you've encountered a time when you've been called racist when you're not or experienced the same unjust treatment that a minority has? Is there really nothing that I say that you agree with or think I have a point about?"

Yes, I've been called a racist before - I've felt strongly that I'm not, i've gone into defensive mode, I've experienced 'white fragility' and then I learned more. Yes I've experienced unjust treatment. No there really is nothing I agree with you on, I really don't think you've made a strong point about anything to be totally honest... I think during this entire conversation your response has been defensiveness and you have attempted to either ignore or just explain away clear cut examples of racism.

"I really don't know how people can have such negative perceptions of me when I aim to do all this. There's not much more I can say."

Because, it is impossible to have these conversations with you. They go nowhere. You refuse to even entertain the thought that you might hold racial biases - it's just impossible for you to even conceive that you might and you approach these discussions with such cognitive dissonance and defensiveness.

"See, I think the American definition of colourblindess just doesn't gel with the British one or anyone who actually adovcates for colourblindess. You've got it all wrong and have jumped to crazy conclusions."

"When I say I try not to see colour, I mean that I take it in but don't react in any negative way because of it. I can't help it if I genuinely don't see colour. I've sometimes seen people of other races and didn't even realise I got their race wrong."

That's not true though. You do genuinely see colour. You do treat people differently because of it. People treat people differently. You just refuse to see it or acknowledge it because you are wearing these colour blind goggles.

"And colourblindness was brought in to eliminate racism, injustice and oppression because if people hadn't made skin colour a big deal back in the day, we wouldn't be where we are now."

But it doesn't eliminate racism, injustice and oppression - it ignores it. Yes, people 'back in the day' made a big deal about skin colour and that history informs our present. When you say 'I don't see colour' what you say is 'I see everyone as if they are white'.

I'm not 'gender blind' If I saw you I would notice you are a woman, you would notice I am a man. There is nothing wrong with that. It doesn't mean I'm imagining all the pain you went through and assigning pitty. You wouldn't enjoy it if I walked up to you and said 'I don't see gender' or 'I don't see you as a man or woman'. That does nothing, it doesn't help. I do see you as a woman and you see me as a man. That influences the way we interact with each other - pretending we don't see gender doesn't help us treat each other the same - it just ignores the fact that we notice difference and act differently.

"I already said that I jumped to all different segments of the video to get an overall perception. I've heard everything that she's said before. She might have been the first to come up with it, but its been regurgitated by others that I've heard many times. And again, I do understand the terminology, I have come across it many times."

Yes, you jumped through the video and (by your own account) dismissed any points made within 30 seconds. You don't understand the terminology... That's super clear. It's not that you just have a genuine criticism - it's that you are consistently equating racism with prejudice and bigotry... You point out instances of anti-white prejudice and bigotry and call that racism... That's not what racism is... If you understood what racism was you would be trying to place that anti-white prejudice and bigotry into a historical, cultural, societal context and explaining how it's linked...

They end up picking one because they think they have to. I know I'd be totally stuck for choice if I were a child in the same situation because both look totally equal to me. I had a black Barbie as a child and I never questioned why she was a different colour to my usual white Barbies or a different colour to me, it didn't even strike me as weird. So, I wouldn't understand "which doll is the good doll and the bad doll?" Based on that, I'd choose the one who looked slightly more possessed, as dolls tend to do! Of course the children aren't going to respond in the astute way I just did - they're children. I've already said that children don't have the reasoning to work out ideas of "these dolls are more prevalent in society, hence, why I think they're the best kind." Children respond instinctively, they haven't developed bigger reasoning skills than this. This is why children can say strong phrases like "I hate you" without really understanding the full weight of the phrase or how it could hurt someone. I even once saw a toddler on You've Been Framed being asked: "do you love mommy?" and he said no and he was even smiling as he said it. Such a thing can sound very sinister to an adult's ears because we know the full implications of such phrases but a child doesn't, they're still learning how the world works. They can grow out of this. So saying, I wouldn't take it lightly if a child said that a skin colour was ugly and try to coach them out of it. No, I'm not saying that all these kids have only seen black children misbehave. But maybe there's only one black child in their class and they're the worst behaved, so they associate ultimate bad behaviour with them. And if they've really just seen black children misbehaving, well...how's that their fault? How is witnessing something making you guilty? What I'm inferring is that the reaction the makers of these experiments want in an ideal world is for the white children to choose the black doll in a positive way. There's a sense of applauding the child for making the "right" choice, which is preferring any race that isn't their own. But why should there be a "right" choice? Just let kids play with what they want to play with. Why is it that white children are encouraged to play with every colour of doll but black children are encouraged to only play with dolls that match their race? That's not equal. Why shouldn't all children be encouraged to play with all dolls and the race they pick doesn't matter? If black girls choosing a doll that looks like them equals self love and high self esteem, why is the white girl demonised for picking a white doll? We've got to make a choice - is it ok to prefer a reflection of your own race in your toys or not? Whatever the decision is must be ruled towards all races, in order to make it equal. We tell black people to prefer their own race and tell white people to prefer anyone who isn't their own race. And then we wonder why racial tensions are so high? Pick one belief and teach everyone the same.

My point in explaining what I thought the pictures meant to me was to prove that actually, white people can have multiple different ways of interpreting something. We don't all give cookie cutter "white person" answers. We have a brain, we look at things critically and fairly. We might even see something that no one else can. I don't always give the answer you want me to give. And after seeing so many of these experiments, I know what the intention behind it is before I've even had time to formulate a reaction, meaning that my reaction might well be null and void. And as for showing one group something but not others, my point is that we can never test the same person's reaction to both situations. I really like watching the various reactions to situations presented in What Would You Do? but the downside of suddenly choosing to switch the race of the actors to see if it might produce a different reaction in passersby isn't fair on the ones who have seen the white actors previously, nor is it fair on the ones who have only seen the black actors. Because we don't know if the white people would have had the same reaction if they'd seen white people. Maybe they would have had exactly the same reaction. Sure, the host asks some of them afterwards if race played a part in them getting involved and they always say that it didn't, they were mad at the situation, they didn't even take in the race of the people involved. Of course some may just be saying that...but maybe they do genuinely feel that way. And who are we to judge them? No, I don't have this set idea in my head of what a racist looks like. Racists come in all shapes and sizes because anyone can have hate in them. But you're completely losing me now when you say that all white people are racist and actively work to maintain the status quo. I don't know how someone can say such horrid things about their own people. I judge on a case by case basis, individualism. You are defining people on their skin colour. This is supposed to be what you're against. Why are white people encouraged to be critical of themselves but no other race is? Yes, these studies are designed to show hidden biases and yes, some people don't think they have any but then it turns out they do, they just don't think they're a big deal. But for some of us, we are acutely aware of any fluctuations in our acceptance levels of others because being unfair doesn't come naturally to us. This is coming from the same person who essentially protected the people who bullied me by not having the guts to do the "mean" thing by reporting them.

Well, I'm not aware of every experiment that goes on - I've never seen such ones done in my own country, they're all American from my research, so I can't offer much. I can't say much more on that front until I've researched a bit deeper. But understand that when I say I'm from Britain, I'm specifically from Scotland, where black people have an even more minute population. The white Scottish population stands at 96% white. Blacks make up just 0.7%.

Yes, whites and blacks use drugs at roughly the same rate, but black people are being convicted at higher rates. Yes, this is partly because there's higher rates of stop and search among blacks. But also, maybe they're just unluckier at being caught dealing/taking in public? There's such a big culture of weed smoking in the black community that some of them smoke it out in full view in public or smoke in the car, then are surprised when the cops pull them over. I mean, I've known white people that smoke it but they keep it well hidden away from public view, only smoking it in the privacy of their own house and are very covert about how they get hold of it. I've never taken drugs because I couldn't deal with the secrecy of it all. I'm not denying that there are racist reasons behind why black people end up convicted and I certainly think harsh sentences for weed is going a bit far. But let's not deny that there are ways to keep such an addiction hidden that aren't always being deployed in the black community.

When I say "good ones" and "bad ones," I'm talking about criminals and non-criminals. I say there's "good ones" and "bad ones" in the white community as well. Why is it you see no problem with that? Don't you want me to treat everyone the same? Treat everyone with the same critical eye that I do my own race?

Yes, I read what I write and yes, I realise that this paragraph was controversial. But some things are just so blatant. If I were black and raising my children in a poor neighbourhood, I'd ensure that I taught my children that crime doesn't pay, that you don't commit crime no matter how poor you are, that you never get involved with gangs, guns, drugs. That you keep your nose clean, stay in school, be respectful. Hell, I'd teach the same thing as a white person to white kids. It's not always the parents fault when their child goes down the wrong path but a solid parenting foundation can work wonders. Why else do some black kids from single mothers in black ghettos still miraculously better themselves and work their way to the top in life? One's individual attitude matters a lot too. I'd say this for all races.

Yes, it's super simplistic because I was just getting down to the root of what race and racism is. That's all. So, you don't think some people believing that different races deserve separation and punishment is not racism? It's just prejudice? Huh?

How the hell does having lighter fluid poured on you while being told this is what you deserve because you're white not constitute a hate crime? You wouldn't say this if the exact same thing happened to a black person! Therefore, you are not holding each race equal in your mind! And I see you omitted the most shocking white hate crime from this quote, but that was to be expected. I guess it was just too much for you to give it a pass. There is no black supremacy in US or UK society, however, there is a culture of dealing with racism very harshly when it happens to minorities. This is a world where a woman can go to the HR department and tell them that she has been subject to sexual harassment and she'll get told (by other women) that she should just sweep it under the rug, yet a black person can go to HR and tell them that they have have been subject to racism by their colleague and that person will get pulled up in front of the boss and maybe even fired. False accusations of racism are strong because most of the time, they are believed, even without proof. Here is one of many cases of false racism accusations destroying a person's career and reputation:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/5017550/Head-teacher-who-suffered-stress-from-racism-accusations-wins-400000-damages.html

If you just don't like a white person, just untruthfully accuse them of being racist - guaranteed it will gain traction, even if the lawholders are white. If it truly were a white supremacist world, white people would be believed immediately if they claimed they were a victim of racial hate crime. In fact, no one would even be allowed to teach the concepts you are speaking of at universities because it doesn't uphold the white agenda. Sociology courses are being changed to take in the new SJW definition of racism which says it can only happen to minorities. It is stifling the true experiences of white hate crime that simply aren't being believed or dealt with seriously. This is a world where police forces won't question suspected Arabs grooming white girls (and tell those close to the victims that they won't do anything) because they don't want to be accused of racism (doesn't actually mention the race angle but I took it from a liberal publication in the hopes you'd perhaps accept the truth of it better): https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/may/15/exposed-rochdale-gangs-grooming-three-girls-catalyst-progress

Now, this next point really is a laugh. You really have no idea what it's like living in Scotland, do you? You naively assume the standard Americanised version of white people living in nice areas with all the best resources, right? Wrong. I live in one of the most impoverished constituencies in Scotland. Yes, in a mostly white area. Houses falling apart, businesses failing, no shop stays around for long, a parade of discount stores as far as the eye can see. People walking around town, dragging on cigarettes, looking much older than their years. Kids in schools acting up (I went to one of the most infamous state schools in the country) with my aunt who's a primary school teacher regularly telling stories of violent children (including one who hits teachers and threatens people with scissors). So hard to get on the property ladder, rents so high for s****y properties. I live in a "suburb" which is nowhere close to American suburbs like Desperate Housewives (such neighbourhoods are like unicorns in these parts). Although I'm not one of them, the reason so many people want Scottish independence is so we can have better resources and funding, as it's all decided by England how much we get and our politicians just have to delegate with what they have. This is why England is the richest country in Britain and Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are suffering - we're sent a pittance to fund our entire countries.

How is none of my experiences connected to white privilege? White privilege would dictate that every white person would be nice to their fellow whites - not the case for me. White privilege would dictate that every white child would be looked at as innocent and treated impeccably by teachers - not the case for me. White privilege would dictate that white women would be regarded as the most beautiful and the most dateable and desirable - not the case for me. White privilege would dictate that a white person gets a job easily, even if they are not fully qualified, especially if interviewed by a white person - not the case for me (I'd also like to add that despite my white name, I can't even get called to an interview as is usually presumed and even when applying for a job where the white interviewer knew one of their employees was my white aunt, it still didn't get me a job). I don't see how all of these things can't be connected to white privilege because it's these points that are claimed as benefits for whites over and over again everywhere I look. And I know you're Australian but you're responding to views of whiteness from an American viewpoint. I can't speak for the Australian view, however.

If I can detect biases towards other people, I think I'd be able to tell that I have racial ones. As I said, hating on people for no real reason is just not in my DNA. I always have very good, researched, justifiable reasons as to why I dislike someone personally and any biases that I do have come from bad experiences with certain types of people. But none of them are minorities, so...

Yes, we are born into a racist society. But that doesn't mean that everyone is racist. And yes, no one's ever sat me down and told me not to be racist but that doesn't mean I absorbed any racist messages I heard. It depends what your frame of mind is and how impressionable you are. I don't know what examples of segregation you're talking about. Inclusion was encouraged throughout my life. I'll bring up this point again later down the line. But you make a good point when you say that we are told to treat people differently, not taught. But I've always been a very obedient person. I just did as I was told.

I was talking in general when I said I could debunk a theory in 30 seconds. Not all the time, but I've seen it many times when SJWs make videos. Perhaps the fact I can debunk it with so many questions that are never answered is proof that the academic hasn't thought through their theory as much as they'd like?

No, you're diluting the term "white supremacy." That word is a leaden weight. You don't throw it around. You don't say a country is white supremacist despite it having human rights laws, anti hate crime laws, anti-racism laws, free speech laws, affirmative action programs, a wealth of Asians at top colleges, a wealth of successful black singers, talkshow hosts and politicians. White supremacy does not approve of minorities rising to the top in any capacity. They don't approve of minorities holding any level of success or power, especially over other whites. Even white nationalism isn't as severe as white supremacy. This is the ultimate term of the worst racism of all. The word racist is flung around too easily either. There's different levels of it but too many people are called that word these days. White supremacist is gradually becoming just as common and it's frightening how diluted these terms have become, how they have been re-shaped to fit a liberal agenda. Real white supremacists wouldn't stand for any of the stuff you insisted can happen in a white supremacist country.

Yes, as a feminist, I believe in the "patriarchy," but I don't use this word. It's so old-fashioned and as soon as you use it, people stop listening. Men in particular, hate it, even ones who are for women's rights. It's a term used to get up people's noses and for that very reason, I don't believe in using it. I'm not the typical feminist you think I am. Yes, I believe that there is plenty of sexism in my country but I don't believe it's inherently sexist or that man in it is sexist. I believe in calling out real sexists, not men who we assume to be sexist until further notice. You'll notice that I apply the same belief systems I have in feminism to race issues. I approach the two as being cut from the same cloth. And whenever I try to say things like: "I'm a feminist and I believe men can be victims of sexism too," "I believe women can carry out hate crime towards men," and "I support women who are all-round good people, but if they'd not, I don't support them"...and then try to point out why can't minorities mirror the same beliefs for whites, they always go silent on me. Because they know I've got a point and have called them out.

No, no, you're totally losing me now by calling me a racist despite me frequently saying that I don't stand for racism. Just because you are taught something doesn't mean you have to absorb it and believe it. I've tried to coach my semi-racist father out of his ways of years and am finally making progress. I've always been outspoken when I've heard something said that I don't believe in, it just flips a switch in my head. I don't blindly follow anything. I know you're not saying I'm evil, but you don't seem to realise that when you say someone is racist despite their protests to the contrary and tell them that they are taught to be racist and can't un-learn it...you're basically saying that no matter how good I try to be, nothing will ever be good enough. That's a terrible life lesson to teach, especially in the current society of perfection. It takes away the basic humanity of a person, it puts white people in the inferior category you think we put minorities in. Some racism combat skills that is. And I did watch the video in full, which I'll go into later.

But have you honestly never been called a racist and truly knew that your accuser was wrong? Have you had that little confidence in your convictions? Do you not believe that you know who you are better than anyone else? Sometimes, there isn't more to learn. Some white people are just non-racist! I've not made any strong points at all? I've even admitted some of yours are correct, I fail to see how you can struggle to find one iota of agreement anywhere in my very fair judgements. Of course I'll be defensive when you're incorrectly calling me a racist. Believe it or not, people tend to get defensive when they're accused of something that's untrue. It's our basic human right.

I don't think my conversations with you go anywhere either, so it's all equal. Don't get me wrong, I've questioned, off-thread, before that I could have racial biases. I've sat down and questioned it all. And concluded I didn't. And trust me, I can be my own worst critic. I've already said I approach any argument I make with the view of the opposition, so it can stand up to any rebuttal. I think I'd know if I held racial biases.

I have never treated anyone differently for their race. I treat them all the same, the way I'd wish to be treated. I treat people as people, without stereotyping them. I find out who they are and what interests them to see what kind of person they are, as opposed to judging on external factors. I do see colour, but my response to it is: "They're black...so?" That doesn't mean I don't acknowledge the racism they may have gone through, but I don't presume, judge or define them by it. I am more than happy to talk about racism. The only reason that I have trepidation is that it might just turn into a battle to show me up to apparently be racist, to demonise the only white person. I just want to talk about race without judgement from anyone nor do I want to judge anyone. And I do not see everyone as white. I see everyone as people who are waiting to be conversed with and discovered, to uncover who they are past the external, supeficial factors.

About the gender blind thing, the only time I want people to identify me as a woman is when it truly matters. When identifying me by external factors, when talking about feminism/sexism and if you're a man who's romantically interested. Other than that, just see me as a person, for then I can be your equal. The fact that women in politics get seen as women first and politicians second is exactly the reason why they get so much disrespect. Most feminists say they just want to be seen and treated as people first, women second. And coming from a woman, surely you're going to automatically believe my viewpoint has weight, considering you're a man and all? Or does this "believe the oppressed group at all costs" viewpoint only apply to race?

I finally watched the entire video. You might be surprised at how many times I agreed with her. She does seem like a nice person and she obviously has good intentions and insight. But I still see problems. As I mentioned earlier, she gives no examples of what she means by American society living in segregation (she does bring up "white schools" but unless there is a genuine school that has an only white policy, she's just exaggerating just because it has a big white population). We also don't choose what countries and areas we are born. Like I said before, I live in a country that is 96% white - chances are, growing up in such an environment makes you more likely to have a white partner, have white kids, live in a white area. The colour of your country doesn't automatically equal privilege, especially if it's impoverished. She speaks from an American standpoint - she doesn't consider international whites whatsoever. The girl who said that she asked the question of "If we are all supposed to love each other, why do people in white sheets want to kill people like me?" - I'd give her a very simple answer, which is "Not every person listens to messages of love and acceptance." I don't know why she doesn't understand that bad people will exist in the world that we can't control - nothing can exist in this world without an opposite and the ironic thing is that without bad, there can be no good. I have never said the majority of the "white excuses" she listed (especially not "I grew up in a diverse area, happens to be black, I used to live in NY, etc" - I hate those excuses just as much as she does). And as for the "white patterns," - not only have I not experienced most of those things myself, I actually felt that these patterns were very prevelent in minority communities especially the whole "preference of segregation and being around your own kind." I thought it was very funny when she brought up "confusing disagreement with lack of understanding." That is precisely what she has been guilty of doing to white people all this time and what I have accusing people of for years, for all different reasons! How can she not see the irony?! And again, I've seen her say all this stuff in shorter, more condensed videos and I've heard all this before. Now you finish by saying that if I understood what racism was, I'd take anti-white prejudice and bigotry and work out how it's linked. Of course I know what the link is and what drives some minorities to be this way. But, going back to what I said a while back - I believe women can carry out gender hate crime toward men. Being a woman doesn't mean you should be treated as a precious little flower. Women have wanted to be responsible for themselves for centuries and they must hold themselves responsible for any crimes they commit and they should be tried as harshly as men. So, no, I equally have no tolerance for the excuse of "minorities were/are treated badly by whites, so any hatred towards them is just natural." No, take responsibility for your crimes and hatred and act like a decent human being. The rest of society is sure expected to.

Sign In

Rapper hangs a kid in his video

Featured Posts

DemeLarell 931

Link to post

Share on other sites

StrawberryBlond 14,891

Link to post

Share on other sites

DemeLarell 931

Link to post

Share on other sites

StrawberryBlond 14,891

Link to post

Share on other sites

DemeLarell 931

Link to post

Share on other sites

Bebe 17,094

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest

Link to post

Share on other sites

StrawberryBlond 14,891

Link to post

Share on other sites

Bebe 17,094

Link to post

Share on other sites

StrawberryBlond 14,891

Link to post

Share on other sites

Morphine Prince 106,238

Link to post

Share on other sites

Bebe 17,094

Link to post

Share on other sites

Whispering 18,865

Link to post

Share on other sites

Regina George 59,387

Link to post

Share on other sites

StrawberryBlond 14,891

Link to post

Share on other sites

Archived

Themes