Do you believe in privilege? White privilege, etc?

[basketcase]

The predudice for South Asian kids appear off the charts -

Yes, because the stereotypes about Asian and South Asian kids is different from those of black or indigenous students.

And the 'culture' argument rings hollow when considering African immigrants, many of whom are coming from cultures that put a high value on family and see education as a priority have a similar experience to Canadians descended from US slaves.

You should also check your facts. There is no 'black only' school. There is a black focus school which is mandated to include African and African-Canadian context in their learning but there is no restriction on who can attend.

 

[escortsxxx]

Yes, because the stereotypes about Asian and South Asian kids is different from those of black or indigenous students.

And the 'culture' argument rings hollow when considering African immigrants, many of whom are coming from cultures that put a high value on family and see education as a priority have a similar experience to Canadians descended from US slaves.

You should also check your facts. There is no 'black only' school. There is a black focus school which is mandated to include African and African-Canadian context in their learning but there is no restriction on who can attend.

That is what I meant but I can see how only was a bad choice of words - I mispoke and I stand corrected.

*edit some removal of text*

PS
You would need to get more data to say in rings hollow. Perhaps those sub groups of the sub groups are not the ones getting in trouble.
As pointed out but others,uneven results do not mean racism or sexism. The prison system has almost all males within and no females - are males being unfairly targeted and female criminals getting off in large numbers? Sure, some of it is proably sexism but there is more to the story than simple sexism. There are some notable cases like the Karla case but again this is no way to know that this is norm.

It has been my experience that those with parents who understand our system have kids do better. Which also effects suspensions - a friend from anther country wishes his own child was punished far more for minor issues and wished his child was suspended already - he finds our system not giving him support by not punishing as he would like. Anyway this is just one of many factors at play.

 

[frankcastle]

Yes…Being a white male means I don’t have to put up with the racism and bigotry that others have to deal with. I still have problems and challenges in my life but thankfully racism is not one of them.

Well put. I think you hit on an important point which is having advantages doesnt mean you are free of problems.

 

[Frankfooter]

And the stats are stats but when there is a significant difference in outcomes between two identifiable groups, there must be something going on.

Uh huh.

 

[Frankfooter]

Well put. I think you hit on an important point which is having advantages doesnt mean you are free of problems.

Or that the advantages are even visible to you, they are just 'normal'.
.

 

[escortsxxx]

Or that the advantages are even visible to you, they are just 'normal'.
.

Yes like my friend in high school who never paid for a meal or drink in her life. It never occurred to her the cost of going out in general - she was aware it was free for her but never considered the flip side.

 

[escortsxxx]

It's amazing how much time you've spent in this thread without reading what people post and instead strawmanning it.

There are overtly racist people but much of the institutional kind is based on subconscious views. the stats back the claim up. Toronto (the good) has number showing black students make up 11% of the population but 35% of suspensions. Meanwhile white kids are suspended at a lower rate than their proportion of the population.
View attachment 81816

https://www.tdsb.on.ca/Portals/0/docs/Caring%20and%20Safe%20Schools%20Report%202017-18,%20TDSB,%20Final_April%202019.pdf

We can also look at the jail population where White/Caucasian people make up only 54% of prisoners despite being 73% of the population.

At the prison level black people are under resented by 1/2 and white people over represented by double - and first nations people are 150 times more likely to be in jail at the federal level. For suspensions First nations have a rate 4 times more than expected

https://www.statista.com/statistics...federal-correctional-services-canada-by-race/

Women have a much lower rate by population and I suspect there suspension rates in school are also very low. Pure sexism?

Regardless there is something going on with the First Nations those numbers are way too high.

 

[TomFord1980]

Saying that a group of people is not in the majority is not a compelling argument that group privilege doesn't exist.

A country cannot so easily be labelled "racist" or "not racist." Reality is much more complicated than that. Neither can a person for that matter. And remember that discussion of privilege is not just about race.

If you really stop to think about it, can you honestly claim that you have never, on any level, treated someone better or worse because of some notion you had about a group identifier you associated with that person?

I guess im not as shallow as some people. I always judge someone by their character and work ethic, not by skin color. Maybe the white people on here who are saying that Canada is racist are guilty for past racial indiscretions and are trying desperately to make up for it?

 

[TomFord1980]

So why are you so resistant to acknowledging that there is an imbalance that POC have to deal with?

p.s. According to the news and the study I quoted, it seems the board IS interested in creating a more level playing field.

I think to set an example, you should sacrifice 25% of your pay for a person of colour. Will you do it?

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

I think to set an example, you should sacrifice 25% of your pay for a person of colour. Will you do it?

Thats not nice, he'd be left with just $10/hour

 

[Roleplayer]

I guess im not as shallow as some people. I always judge someone by their character and work ethic, not by skin color. Maybe the white people on here who are saying that Canada is racist are guilty for past racial indiscretions and are trying desperately to make up for it?

So your claim is that you're above all that.

I didn't only ask about race. This topic is about privilege (and consequently also discrimination) of all kinds. I asked if you have ever treated someone better or worse based on group identifiers. Note that in the post I previously quoted, you referred to someone as a "loony far left liberal." You're now accusing people of trying desperately to make up for past racial indiscretions because they agree with a particular argument, one which quite obviously is not only made by White people.

In other words: you're making judgments about people in the absence of any actual information in the very same posts in which you say you're not as shallow as some people. It's a little hard to take that argument seriously.

 

[escortsxxx]

From the 1989 paper that invented the term

item #22

I can take a job with an affirmative
action employer without having co-
workers on the job suspect that I got it
because of race.

 

[escortsxxx]

So your claim is that you're above all that.

I didn't only ask about race. This topic is about privilege (and consequently also discrimination) of all kinds. I asked if you have ever treated someone better or worse based on group identifiers. Note that in the post I previously quoted, you referred to someone as a "loony far left liberal." You're now accusing people of trying desperately to make up for past racial indiscretions because they agree with a particular argument, one which quite obviously is not only made by White people.

In other words: you're making judgments about people in the absence of any actual information in the very same posts in which you say you're not as shallow as some people. It's a little hard to take that argument seriously.

The invention of the term privilege is from the paper about white privilege - thus with the exception of a legally privileged class such as knights and what not the word privilege is always tied to race its part of the etymology - in much the same way that Xmas is always tied to the Greek language and to some degree fish. Use a different word if you want to remove the etymological context.
And privilege is a white person concept debated by white people. Perhaps it has it to nations of other ethnicity. And arguments are not confirmed to one group based on there outward appearance or group identity. For example the Japanese government allied with the Nazi's and affirmed their polices for political reasons that claimed Aryan supremacy despite being on the naughty list so "one which quite obviously is not only made by White people." is a far fetched and anti-historic assumption with no admission to "false consciousness" which we see with Trump supporters (of various sexes races and economic groups) who support and repeat arguments that further there own oppression.
That being said, there was nothing wrong with you clarifying what you intended to say - as you did. Obvsioulsy this is a forum where everyone is sloppy of speech and just brainstorming concepts so its expected everyone will rely on the good will of others to help the discussion along.

https://psychology.umbc.edu/files/2016/10/White-Privilege_McIntosh-1989.pdf

 

[Roleplayer]

The invention of the term privilege is from the paper about white privilege - thus with the exception of a legally privileged class such as knights and what not the word privilege is always tied to race its part of the etymology - in much the same way that Xmas is always tied to the Greek language and to some degree fish. Use a different word if you want to remove the etymological context.
And privilege is a white person concept debated by white people. Perhaps it has it to nations of other ethnicity. And arguments are not confirmed to one group based on there outward appearance or group identity. For example the Japanese government allied with the Nazi's and affirmed their polices for political reasons that claimed Aryan supremacy despite being on the naughty list so "one which quite obviously is not only made by White people." is a far fetched and anti-historic assumption with no admission to "false consciousness" which we see with Trump supporters (of various sexes races and economic groups) who support and repeat arguments that further there own oppression.
That being said, there was nothing wrong with you clarifying what you intended to say - as you did. Obvsioulsy this is a forum where everyone is sloppy of speech and just brainstorming concepts so its expected everyone will rely on the good will of others to help the discussion along.

https://psychology.umbc.edu/files/2016/10/White-Privilege_McIntosh-1989.pdf

Sorry, but this is completely wrong.

I've ready the McIntosh article. She explicitly discusses male privilege in the first paragraph. Privilege as a concept is not solely about race. I don't know how you can make this claim while linking to the very article under discussion at the same time.

Also, the term existed long before that article was published.

BTW, I was involved in a real-world discussion just a few days ago in which a Black individual subscribed to the notion of privilege, including White privilege.

 

[escortsxxx]

Your point is that you have no point? If you do want to investigate on a scientific basis, that means you need to come with a testable hypothesis that better explains the evidence. Without that you're simply expressing discomfort because you don't like what's being said.

So the spaghetti monster must exist until proven otherwise? You can reject a claim by deduction or induction without putting forth "the God of the gaps" or an alternative model which is what Galileo did over the perfection of the moon. He did not need to explain why the moon was not prefect only that it was clearly not the pristine object imagined.

But again why are men in prison at such a high rate - must be gods will?

 

[escortsxxx]

Sorry, but this is completely wrong.

I've ready the McIntosh article. She explicitly discusses male privilege in the first paragraph. It is not solely about race. I don't know how you can make this claim while linking to the very article under discussion at the same time.

Also, the term existed long before that article was published.

BTW, I was involved in a real-world discussion just a few days ago in which a Black individual subscribed to the notion of privilege, including White privilege.

Apparently straw manning was too strong, and caused the reader not to finish it So rather than strawman I will refer only to the artilce on the concept. Its a shame, since they did not read how the statement was purposely false to indicate a point.

See

They look white but say they're black: a tiny town in Ohio wrestles with race

Many residents in East Jackson were raised to identify as black – even though it’s largely an inherited identity. So what dictates race: where you live, your DNA, the history you’re taught?

www.theguardian.com

Nothing did I say made the paper ONLY about race. Now, with that context figure out how I can make an etymological argument - you see it works fine.

The below is a bit of amusement mixed with actual facts, its hyperbole for effect. Trigger warning.

Sure W. E. B. Du Bois mental privilege and the discussion of non discriminatory unconscious privilege and the use of "white skin" privilege predate this paper, but main stream culture are tied to this feminist paper on the concept which some argue used cultural appropriation stealing from non-academic fairly uneducated civil right fighters for the cause of feminism - and now we all play with the stolen concept from this white washing to make it generic and disagree or agree weaken its original activist purpose - but the paper was the one that as you yourself pointed out accidentally watered down and belittled the concept to move the focus to white educated women from people who where still being murdered in South Africa. Progress! But even that paper was not willing to totally divorce the concept from its origins. Just like rock and roll implies Jazz music and the community that birthed it, this word and concept is tied to race in general discussion so its certainly understandable that someone would echo back to its non-academic roots however much we ignore it.

 

[Roleplayer]

If a black person talks about privilege he is white by definition. You should inform the person they have been mislabled .
See

They look white but say they're black: a tiny town in Ohio wrestles with race

Many residents in East Jackson were raised to identify as black – even though it’s largely an inherited identity. So what dictates race: where you live, your DNA, the history you’re taught?

www.theguardian.com

Straw manning, I can do it too.

Nothing did I say made the paper ONLY about race. Now, with that context figure out how I can make an etymological argument - you see it works fine.

Sure W. E. B. Du Bois mental privilege and the discussion of non discriminatory unconscious privilege and the use of "white skin" privilege predate this paper, but main stream culture are tied to this feminist paper on the concept which some argue used cultural appropriation stealing from non-academic fairly uneducated civil right fighters for the cause of feminism - and now we all play with the stolen concept from this white washing to make it generic and disagree or agree weaken its original activist purpose - but the paper was the one that as you yourself pointed out accidentally watered down and belittled the concept to move the focus to white educated women from people who where still being murdered in South Africa. Progress! But even that paper was not willing to totally divorce the concept from its origins. Just like rock and roll implies Jazz music and the community that birthed it, this word and concept is tied to race in general discussion so its certainly understandable that someone would echo back to its non-academic roots however much we ignore it.

First of all, you said the term is always tied to race.

And your first statement in this post is so offensive that I'm done talking to you.

 

[Roleplayer]

Apparently straw manning was too strong, and caused the reader not to finish it So rather than strawman I will refer only to the artilce on the concept. Its a shame, since they did not read how the statement was purposely false to indicate a point.

See

They look white but say they're black: a tiny town in Ohio wrestles with race

Many residents in East Jackson were raised to identify as black – even though it’s largely an inherited identity. So what dictates race: where you live, your DNA, the history you’re taught?

www.theguardian.com

Nothing did I say made the paper ONLY about race. Now, with that context figure out how I can make an etymological argument - you see it works fine.

The below is a bit of amusement mixed with actual facts, its hyperbole for effect. Trigger warning.

Sure W. E. B. Du Bois mental privilege and the discussion of non discriminatory unconscious privilege and the use of "white skin" privilege predate this paper, but main stream culture are tied to this feminist paper on the concept which some argue used cultural appropriation stealing from non-academic fairly uneducated civil right fighters for the cause of feminism - and now we all play with the stolen concept from this white washing to make it generic and disagree or agree weaken its original activist purpose - but the paper was the one that as you yourself pointed out accidentally watered down and belittled the concept to move the focus to white educated women from people who where still being murdered in South Africa. Progress! But even that paper was not willing to totally divorce the concept from its origins. Just like rock and roll implies Jazz music and the community that birthed it, this word and concept is tied to race in general discussion so its certainly understandable that someone would echo back to its non-academic roots however much we ignore it.

I said that privilege is not only discussed by White people, and you said that was a far-fetched and anti-historic assumption. Then I told you I had a very recent example of this not being false in my direct experience, and this somehow necessitated you posting a ridiculous and offensive rebuttal. Could you not just accept that it isn't only White people who discuss privilege? Was that really too hard?

You have misrepresented my points over and over again. You have made nonsense claims over and over again and then shifted them when called on it.

Nowhere is this more evident than in this example of you going back to edit out the offending statement.

 

[escortsxxx]

I said that privilege is not only discussed by White people, and you said that was a far-fetched and anti-historic assumption. Then I told you I had a very recent example of this not being false in my direct experience, and this somehow necessitated you posting a ridiculous and offensive rebuttal. Could you not just accept that it isn't only White people who discuss privilege? Was that really too hard?

You have misrepresented my points over and over again. You have made nonsense claims over and over again and then shifted them when called on it.

Nowhere is this more evident than in this example of you going back to edit out the offending statement.

Did you read the entire context? Obviously not. As I said I was strawmanning to show you how it feels - however since obviously people take things out of context, I thought it advisable since certain people do not have the fortitude to read and comprehend certain forms of indirect argument. Anyway you have not as lesson done the same thing to me now, and I am not over reacting. Imagine what you felt and apply that to what you are writing now. Hopefully it is helpful.

 

[Roleplayer]

Did you read the entire context? Obviously not. As I said I was strawmanning to show you how it feels - however since obviously people take things out of context, I thought it advisable since certain people do not have the fortitude to read and comprehend certain forms of indirect argument. Anyway you have not as lesson done the same thing to me now, and I am not over reacting. Imagine what you felt and apply that to what you are writing now. Hopefully it is helpful.

Yes I read the article and the rest of your post, so your "obviously not" is unwarranted.

Here's the problem: you made an incredibly offensive statement, which acted in direct furtherance of your previous statements (that "privilege is a white person concept debated by white people" and that "'[the existence of privilege is an argument] which quite obviously is not only made by White people' is a far fetched and anti-historic assumption"), with no preamble or further explanation except a link to an article that could be interpreted to serve multiple purposes. When I then took offense to it, you are somehow surprised that it comes across as offensive, and then say "certain people do not have the fortitude to read and comprehend certain forms of indirect argument."

I find it very disingenuous to act like your statement is defensible when you went back to edit it out and replace it with condescending language.

And I really couldn't be bothered to go back and trace the number of times you've twisted my arguments into something else.