The Hypocrisy Of The Ultra Feminist

What if his stapler gets stolen though?

 

he can burn down the whole fucking building and go live on the beach. let's see a black woman get away with that.

 

The problem with the word privilege here is what you describe is the way all humans should be treated.

 

Isn't that the point of most people (incl. themnax) when they point out that this privilege exists?

It's like proclaiming 'all lives matter' in reaction to the remark 'black lives matter'. Uhm... duh. That's the exact point of those people in the first place

 

You speak of the objective picture, but what exactly are you claiming that to be, and what supports that claim? How is it that you know the objective truth and others don't?

Those who posit the existence of white privilege seem to do so on the level of sterotype, e.g., "We all know that...[fill in the blank with stereotype of white privilege]", which makes it no different than any other type of stereotype, except that it is socially acceptable.

So what exactly is white privilege, and what evidence is there of its existence?

And beyond a conceptual notion of "white privilege", why is it proper to consider white people, or any demographic category, as a group rather than as individuals?

 

Egalitarianism: aiming for equal wealth, status, etc., for all people.

Feminism: the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities.

Redundant: repeating something else and therefore unnecessary.

Narcissism: love of or sexual desire for one's own body.

 

What is white privilege? Obviously it is all relative, in the sense that it is relative to black and ethnic minorities in the West. If everyone in the world were white, then white privilege would not exist. So you have to do sociological comparisons between ethnic groups.

For example, in the UK where I'm from, black people are statistically much more likely to be stopped and searched by the police, in prison, under-educated, unemployed, discriminated in the workplace, and subject to racial abuse.

As for your second question, sociology is the study of groups, whereas psychology is the study of the individual. Both have their place.

 

White privilege is just a buzzword to silence anyone who isn't a person of color.

Now getting back to the original topic of the thread, for some reason I don't expect any modern feminist to express any concern over this recent event: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3773014/At-four-women-sexually-assaulted-immigrant-men-rampage-party-Germany-chilling-echo-New-Year-s-Eve-attacks.html

 

Here's a measured and well-expressed response.

"As a feminist, I am opposed to all sexual harassment. It is a crude but effective weapon for making women feel that they are not welcome in public spaces and in public life more generally; I’ve been writing on and off for five years about internet abuse and how that puts off women from participating in discussions online.

Yet, for many, that simply won’t do. It is not enough to say that misogyny comes in many forms, and is depressingly ­universal across cultures and history. We have to cordon off the Cologne attacks; erect a little white tent around the crime scene and give thanks that we are safely outside it. Ah, how blissful it is, here on the outside, where the person most likely to kill a woman is her intimate partner, and where 85,000 women and 12,000 men are raped every year.

And that brings me to the other reason I didn’t want to write about the Cologne attacks. All the people who piously enquired as to whether I, as a feminist, had “anything to say” about them didn’t really care whether I did or not. They wanted me to say what they wanted to hear: that Muslims are uniquely sexist, and that letting in refugees from Muslim-majority countries will mean rolling back women’s rights and importing the worst excesses of sharia law to the streets of Coventry. Unless Western liberals wake up, Islamists will be chopping off hands outside Pret A Manger by 2018.

To put it politely, this is not the framing in which any reasonable conversation about women’s rights can happen. First, the terms are too vague: is the problem Muslims (all one billion of them)? Or men from specific countries? Or just “brown men” or “foreigners”? Without identifying the problem, there is little hope of a solution.

Then there is the musty undertone of paternalism mixed with white supremacy. When Dylann Roof stormed a historically black church in South Carolina, one of his grievances was that “you rape our women, and you’re taking over our country”. This formulation – “our women” – was also used by Tommy Robinson, formerly of the English Defence League, after the New Year’s Eve attacks. Reread the commentary on Cologne and count how much concern is expressed for migrant women, shackled for life to these attackers, or for the families that unaccompanied male migrants have left behind to live in poverty. You won’t find much. In this formulation, the problem is not that certain men are misogynist; it’s that the targets of their misogyny belong to someone else. To me, the unspoken coda to “You rape our women” is always “. . . and that’s our job”.

You can see this most clearly in the rhetoric of the self-described men’s rights activists, whose usual response to allegations of sexual assault is disbelief. (Their websites are full of accusations that women routinely lie about rape.) And yet, in the case of Cologne, they have become instant converts to #ibelieveher. Why? Because this allows them implicitly to reproach Western feminists for not seeming grateful enough to men for allowing them the freedoms they currently enjoy. In this way, women’s ability to walk safely in public is cast not as a fundamental human right, but as a special privilege, nobly granted to them by European men."

Written by Helen Lewis, a "modern feminist".

Responses to these attacks were wide-ranging and represented a broad church of opinion. I personally felt that some of the responses were inadequate, some unhelpful and some downright wrong, while I agreed with others (including this one) but to suggest that there were no responses at all is fucking ridiculous, and betrays a fundamental inability to use google.

The problem for many seems to be that "failing to say anything" about an event like this really means "failing to sneer at people on my behalf." If you don't blame the people they want blamed, you might as well not have said anything. And if you're a woman, they probably wouldn't have read your stuff anyway.

 

Jeremy Corbyn recently pledged to put women at the centre of his manifesto. I pointed out the error of his terminology, since man is clearly at the heart of that. He should have said "his womanisfesto"

The lefty liberals all sang his praises, but the lgbt community were not so happy about it all because only two of the three female leaders of the three main Scottish parties were lesbians.

And so the fight goes on for equality and fairness, mean while black men are still shot in the street by police for nothing and locked in prison for smoking a plant.

50 years ago were were still locking people in prison in this country for being gay. We don't do that anymore, and everything must have a female leader now because they've all been male up until now, even it's Theresa May or HIllary Clinton. What matters is that we are a civilised society and they have vaginas.

The latest espisode of Star Trek Continues (ep 7) is about this actually, an interesting take on the Hillary for President because she is a woman debate.

 

Not in my experience. Like when it comes up on this forum that is generally not the case at all. Curiously enough I did notice more than once that some people who don't like taking the idea that there really is some white privilege serious abuse the word PC to discredit/silence such talk

 

^
In my experience I've been lectured that women can't be sexist, and people of color can't be racist.

In either case, this article sums up my views on modern feminism and why I believe it's sealing up it's own fate http://www.smh.com.au/comment/feminists-treat-men-badly-and-its-bad-for-feminism-20160703-gpxbcp.html and it was written by a woman too, so it can't be brushed off as mansplaining.

 

The reason people say people of color can't be racist is because a minority can't systemically oppress a majority, in most cases at least. I'm sure there are exceptions, but in most cases the majority will subsequently hold the majority of positions of power.

The human mind categorizes. Thats how our intelligence evolved to understand our world. So yes, black people can put white people into little boxes and believe negative stereotypes about them. To this extent, everyone is capable of racism and most people probably are a little racist.

But in terms of the bigger picture, where we all take our categories and stereotypes and inject them into culture, education, the workplace, the justice system, then it is difficult for the minority to systemically oppress the majority precisely because they are the minority.

 

When people say "Black people can't be racist" or "women can't be sexist", they are technically wrong.

However it is essentially a shorthand way to say "when women or ethnic minorities are prejudiced against white men, it doesn't matter as much because generally white men can just laugh all the way to their better-paid jobs and not be shot by the police on the way."