patrick.net

goat says

the fact that they benefit despite there being 0 information to suggest that this specific person is deserving of it (aside from their whiteness)

Who gives a fuck?

So because some white kid has a rich mommy and daddy, that's the platform blacks are going to use to justify having a near 80% single parent rate, extremely low high school and college graduation rates, and committing half the violent crime in the country despite being 13% of the population?

Because some rich white kid had parents (or grand parents) who made a nice life for their family, so now they are the "unfair" beneficiaries of privilege?

That's called excuse making, and it's part of the reason why blacks fail to succeed in a market economy, the market doesn't care about RACE, or excuses, it cares about results.

RA is sending his UV Radiation to kill the White Devil Yakub's White Demons-henchmen and their White Privilege.

Take a tip from the liberal propaganda and use phrasing like "why do you hate people of color liberals?" "Anyone who votes liberal had blood on their hands."

Goran_K says

So because some white kid has a rich mommy and daddy, that's the platform blacks are going to use to justify having a near 80% single parent rate, extremely low high school and college graduation rates, and committing half the violent crime in the country despite being 13% of the population?

Because some rich white kid had parents (or grand parents) who made a nice life for their family, so now they are the "unfair" beneficiaries of privilege?

Don't forget the Poor Whites that are the first to go to college or not work in a coal mine? "Oh, you're white, so you had a nice life growing up in a McMansion." when the kid grew up in a hovel in Eastern Tennessee and was molested by his Uncle.

Ironically it's some black chick who actually grew up in a McMansion paid for by her two Black government worker parents who usually assumes all Whites have "privilege" and didn't learn where babies came from until 15 because she was so sheltered.

Feux Follets says

Nothing to win, white privilege is alive and real just like "privilege" exists in other ethnic communities however white privilege is much more prevalent - even today in the United States.

"White privilege" is just an excuse lazy minorities use to explain why their lives aren't so great. The reason it's more prevalent is because it's too taboo to say "Lots of Blacks are lazy and dependent on social welfare to ever get anywhere", but it doesn't make it any less true.

TwoScoopsPlissken says

Ironically it's some black chick who actually grew up in a McMansion paid for by her two Black government worker parents who usually assumes all Whites have "privilege" and didn't learn where babies came from until 15 because she was so sheltered.

Sometimes it's not even a black person, it's some white middle class guy like Sean King who is the one screaming "white privilege" while he collects a nice 6 digit check from the NAACP, and the DNC.

1. So long as college and graduate school (including medical school) admission standards are higher for White and Asians than for Blacks, it's reasonable for students to assume that their White and Asian classmates are likely to be academically more competent than their Black classmates in the same school (and statistically guaranteed to observe that; talk about conditioning students to notice racial difference!). So long as the admission standards are tilted, it's also reasonable for employers to assume that White and Asian graduates are more competent than Black graduates. In fact, for a patient who doesn't know anything else about his/her doctor when picking a primary care doctor, it is reasonable to assume that a White or Asian doctor would be better than a Black doctor, and be statistically correct! Simply due to the different admission standards at medical schools. This correct assumption (and observed result) has nothing to do with "White Privilege," but is the direct result of admission bias. If we limited Blacks to only 11% among NBA players, the Whites and Asian players in NBA due to quota (instead of their own competence as is the case now) would show decidedly sub-par performance compared to the Black players; even clearer at college basketball level, as the sampling size would be bigger, therefore more conforming to statistical average.

2. While the overwhelming majority of Whites in America do not have slave owners among ancestors (most German and Italian immigrants came to the US long after the Civil War, and even before the Civil War only 1-2% of Whites in the US were slave owners), most non-recent immigrant Blacks in the US however do have slave owners (not just Black slaves, but White slave-owners ) among ancestors. Think about the female domestic slaves on the plantations, female hypergamy would drive her towards mating with the slave-owner's family instead of her fellow slaves. It's the same reason why nurses want to mate with doctors instead of fellow nurses, female office workers want to mate with bosses instead of janitors, etc. etc.. This mating bias also explains why Black Americans usually have much lighter skin tone than African Blacks, also why the average IQ of American Blacks is around 85 instead the 65 among Blacks in Africa. There are high IQ African Black tribes, like Ibos, but they did not get kidnapped and sold into slavery; the high IQ tribes were more likely the slave kidnappers and slave traders on the continent before selling to European ships. This pervasive mixed ancestry was a big reason why there had to be a "one drop of blood" law in order to sustain the evil slave plantation system; otherwise, they'd run out of slaves within a few generations as female slaves would consistently mate with white slave owners in order to save their own children from slavery, thereby depriving the plantation of its source of labor.

The concept of "White Privilege" may well be a form of projection from the biological prerogative by female Black Americans (of previous generations) when they selectively mated with both slave-owning White males, then black males with lighter skin tones that signaled having slave-owner ancestors. That explains how American Blacks' skin tone became so much lighter than their African ancestors within only a few generations.

It's also worth pointing out that, all of today's living people on this planet trace ancestry to Africa. We are all Africans by ancestry. Some of our ancestors just left Africa earlier and had to face harsher climate conditions that killed lots of them to push evolution forward. The lighter skin tone was adaptation to lower UV exposure necessitating more absorption in order to have produce Vitamin D helping calcium absorption resulting in stronger bones; higher IQ and delayed gratification were necessary for saving seeds and herds over winter, which was experienced by human ancestors only after getting out of Africa.

Feux Follets says

Goran_K says

The "victim hood" game can never end, because anyone posting on PatNet can never win it.

Nothing to win, white privilege is alive and real just like "privilege" exists in other ethnic communities however white privilege is much more prevalent - even today in the United States.

You made the claim, now prove it.

I suggest the rest of us hold anyone accountable who makes fantastical claims, and be relentless about it.

So you can’t.

You believe it on blind faith.

Interesting.

Feux Follets says

As for the claim prove that it does not exist in all of the various nuances and subtleties. Something as simple as a person's name on an application for work or credit is enough to sway a decision.

Would be nice to provide some statistics on these claims, other than just generic talk. One can claim that xe has unicorns in the garden and should we just believe that person? I provided statistics on med school admissions above. I can provide another interesting statistics for UC system admission scores by race, if just med school data is not enough. Take a guess - do Asians need substantially higher scores than the rest to get in, and which races/population groups need the lowest scores to get in?

drB6 says

Take a guess - do Asians need substantially higher scores than the rest to get in, and which races/population groups need the lowest scores to get in?

We all know the answer to that question.

Goran_K says

We all know the answer to that question.

Yes, but some of us will pretend that they do not know the answer, and anyway that is not discrimination unless the same thing would be done to other racial groups.

There are some interesting Asian-American lawsuits now pending. Also, this article is interesting: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article196035824.html

Advocates also point to a 2009 study by a Princeton University professor that concluded an Asian American applicant would need to score 140 points higher than a white applicant on the 1600-point SAT, 270 points higher than a Latino applicant and 450 points higher than a black applicant to have the same odds of being admitted to 10 elite colleges that he examined.

Who is being discriminated against?

Racism against asians is okay because Democrats need Hispanic and Black votes, not really asian votes.

Goran_K says

Racism against asians is okay because Democrats need Hispanic and Black votes, not really asian votes.

Asians are often independent and successful so it is hard to sway their vote with favorable admission and other advantageous discrimination. However many Asians also work in govt/municipal jobs with good pensions (post office, schools etc.) and Dems know that they already got those votes . I assume the Asian vote is fairly steady and can't be swayed either way much.

mell says

Asians are often independent and successful so it is hard to sway their vote with favorable admission and other advantageous discrimination. However many Asians also work in govt/municipal jobs with good pensions (post office, schools etc.) and Dems know that they already got those votes . I assume the Asian vote is fairly steady and can't be swayed either way much.

It's also very small. I think 2-3% of the national total. Less meaty by Dem standards.

drB6 says

Would you have some quantification as to white privilege?

No, I don't, but I have a feeling if they had a good way to measure it, it would be non-trivial.

I was simply defining what it is, and stating that I think it's just a new word (albeit, a racially charged one) for the same age old thing - stereotyping. I don't really think it implies that whites overall have it better, just that they enjoy certain specific benefits, which is undeniable IMO. But, doesn't everyone enjoy their own specific privileges?

I also agree with the general sentiment in this thread that "white privilege" is invoked mostly by lames as a way to attack, or to justify their own failures / misery. IMO the concept of white privilege is sound and accurate, but the way it gets used in practice is a clever attack on whites that somehow passes under the racism radars and is not only allowed, but strangely encouraged. Just like it's prejudice/racist to assume someone will perform poorly in college because they're black, it's prejudice/racist to tell a white that their success is due to their skin color, not their merit. It may or may not be true, but it's racist because they don't actually know.

Goran_K says

the fact that they benefit despite there being 0 information to suggest that this specific person is deserving of it (aside from their whiteness)

That's called excuse making,

No, it's not. The concept & definition of white privilege has nothing to do with excuse making.

However, the way many people wield & abuse the concept as a way to justify their failings - that is excuse making.

Reality says

So long as the admission standards are tilted, it's also reasonable for employers to assume that White and Asian graduates are more competent than Black graduates.

Yes!

I've always wondered if the very programs meant to help certain classes of people actually harm them more (in other ways).

Lets say an employer hires based purely on merit, and applies the same standards to hiring regardless of color. Now, lets say that they end up with 2.5% black, but they want to get to 5%, so they lower their standards slightly just for black people.

So, compared to the other employees who were hired based on an objective merit standard, 2.5% of the black employees aren't up to standard, and likely to under perform. I think this will lead to other employees seeing this under performance, and developing biases that blacks in general under perform (because, after all, that is truly their personal experience). These people then carry that negative bias with them for a period of time, maybe their whole life, and its breeds the "silent racist".

On the other hand, I think no/less bias would manifest if they stuck to pure merit, because then the employee experience's would have been "my black coworkers perform just as well".

I think this effect happens in software jobs with women - not a ton of female applicants, but employers seem to strive in the direction of hiring equal male / female numbers (although, they don't usually get quite that far). And, this lowered average competence negatively affects the women who are truly great.

I also think this effect happens in college due to race based admissions / affirmative action.

goat says

The concept & definition of white privilege has nothing to do with excuse making.

Okay, so what is it?

If Oprah runs for President, she can give everyone a car.

goat says

So, compared to the other employees who were hired based on an objective merit standard, 2.5% of the black employees aren't up to standard, and likely to under perform. I think this will lead to other employees seeing this under performance, and developing biases that blacks in general under perform (because, after all, that is truly their personal experience). These people then carry that negative bias with them for a period of time, maybe their whole life

This makes perfect sense in both directions (for Asians in other direction). Also, getting rid of an incompetent black female is impossible; incompetent white/Asian male is comparatively easy to fire. Which also makes one think if they should hire that female unless they are absolutely sure she is competent.