If "white privilege" actually existed... - Politics Discussion

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Out of curiosity I googled one of these headlines. And it returns results from daily caller, brietbart, and dozens of right-wing websites who are circulating this list.

No legitimate news sources turn up. Not even Fox if you consider them legit.

Also. We have a president who acts idiotic on a daily basis and calls himself the "chosen one." Fox lost their minds when Obama wore a tan suit once.

There's your white privilege.
So are you posting from Russia? Or are you just a traitor to your country trying to incite domestic terror?

reply

[–] Wuchak (8855) 5 years ago

Really? So you don't know about the outrageous Smollett case or the Covington idiocy last Winter? Are you saying they didn't really happen? As for the rest, they're documented and Lib "news" outlets (which you amusingly call "legitimate news sources") naturally put such embarrassments under the rug ASAP because they don't fit their false narrative.

America is so great that a privileged black gay man has to hire two Nigerian brothers to "oppress" him, lol.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

You didn't post a link with any notated sources. I've heard of some of these.
Now compare it to this list of 1,051 actual hate crimes committed since Trump was elected to office:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/12/hate_in_america_a_list_of_racism_bigotry_and_abuse_since_the_election.html

So in the face of legitimate reports of actual hate crimes why would an individual like yourself (or the people on brietbart and other "conservative" websites) circulate this list?
It's like complaining that some of the trees in a forest fire weren't actually burned. It doesn't negate the fact that a forest fire occurred.
Why do you think that your method of confirmation biased reporting is fooling anyone?

reply

[–] Wuchak (8855) 5 years ago

If the hate crimes on your list were real they would've been plastered all over the lamestream media -- i.e. the outlets you claim to be "legitimate news sources" -- in an effort to denounce Trump seeing as how they suffer pathological TDS.

The fake hate crimes on my list are documented, look 'em up yourself (like I said, the Liberal media tries to cover them up). And why did you utterly ignore Smollett's outrageous case and the Covington lie?

If white-on-minority hate crimes were as prevalent as you claim why do Dems/Libs have to constantly invent false hate crimes? Obviously to support their fake narrative.

By the way, I noticed you conveniently failed to address the main question of this thread: If "white privilege" is a valid serious oppression in America, why do people like Rachel Dolezal and Elizabeth Warren lie about their ethnicities to get ahead? Obviously because there's something called Liberal privilege and minority privilege.

Or are you just a traitor to your country trying to incite domestic terror?

Are you seriously trying to suggest that Dems/Libs have America's best interests in mind and are loyal to the noble principles of our wise forefathers and foremothers? (LOL). Why Sure!

reply

[–] JoWilli (21627) 5 years ago

complete prawnage, no wonder why you self deleted...

reply

[–] zaq123 (2389) 5 years ago

Instead of complaining about the source of the headlines why don't you go ahead and debunk any one of them?

How about the most recent and notorious. Those should be the easiest right?

How about Smollett or the Covington Kids? Take your pick.

reply

[–] ultravioletx (10237) 5 years ago

The Covington Kid got his stupid face caught in a viral video. It happens. If you don't want negative attention, don't make a stupid face with a camera pointed at you. People have been embarrassed much worse for much "friendlier" conduct.

The two guys Smollett supposedly paid to assault him keep changing their stories and can't seem to find a lawyer willing to put up with them. They've also been spotted slandering homosexuals.

reply

[–] zaq123 (2389) 5 years ago

So if you don't look at someone who's pounding a drum in your face in a way you deem "not stupid" that gives the biased media license to slander you? OK if you say so.

Smollett is guilty and you know it.

reply

[–] ultravioletx (10237) 5 years ago

If you make a stupid face in front of a camera, and everyone including Joe Rogan agrees your face looks punchable, then you kinda put yourself in the position to be in a viral video. The guy saw a conflict between the black Hebrew nationalists and the Covington kids and started drumming and singing, even getting some of the kids to sing along. But that one kid decided to keep a stupid smile on his face while being recorded. The MAGAs got upset because the kid's stupid face brought along bad PR. Nobody cared about that bad PR except the MAGAs. Everybody else just saw a stupid face from a kid that went viral.

What is Smollett guilty of? He didn't beat himself up. If someone is paid to kill a loved one of yours, you don't give the killer a pass if you find out who paid him. If you have a functional brain, the killer deserves most of the blame. He took the money, and he committed the act. But in the case of Smollett, right-wingers don't care who committed the act. And since the entire right wing went eating from the wrong trail of crumbs, Smollett became untouchable. Well done, doofuses.

reply

[–] zaq123 (2389) 5 years ago

You forget how the Indian portrayed himself as a victim. He wasn't trying to help.

You're more full of shit than a Christmas turkey. I'm not even going to waste time reading what you say about Smollet..

reply

[–] Gd5150 (11965) 5 years ago

Elizabeth Warren would have no career if she hadn’t lied and said she was an Indian. She’s as dumb as a post. Any surprise she’s a front runner for communist Democrat media/party? No.

reply

[–] Wuchak (8855) 5 years ago

What's it say about modern America that Fauxcahontas Warren is a serious candidate for the Dems?

reply

[–] ultravioletx (10237) 5 years ago

It says that the working class of America are tired of getting screwed over by corporate America, and Trump's silly name-calling tactics died when he overused them in 2016. Lyin Ted, Crooked Hillary, Little Marco, Low Energy Jeb, Crazy Bernie, Pocahontas... nobody cares any more except MAGAs. MAGAs are the only ones still caring about the fiction Trump sells nowadays. Everyone else is ready to move on from his failed presidency.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

I think white privilege is about what you don't have to deal with. Racism that's both conscious and subconscious, for example.

reply

[–] Wuchak (8855) 5 years ago

But how exactly do you prove that kind of privilege exists? Regardless, we shouldn't discount minority privilege and, more specifically, Liberal minority privilege.

Take, for instance, the case at the Mall of America last April where a black Muslim pushed a white boy off the 3rd story balcony and there was inexplicable media silence. Imagine the outrage if a white Christian male did the same to a black boy?

Anyone who thinks minorities don't have privileges are blind: How does Sarah Jeong, a "journalist" for the NY Times, get away with her outrageous racist op-eds/tweets? How does Farrakhan get away with his constant racist blather? Why are severe black-on-white crimes swept under the rug by the mainstream media? How come the lamestream media doesn't denounce black politicians in South Africa legally taking measures to seize the property of white citizens without compensation? How was illegal immigrant José Inez García Zárate welcomed to San Francisco, protected from Federal authorities, his 5 illegal entries into this country ignored, supplied expensive criminal defense and acquitted for the blatant murder of Kate Steinle?

If minority privilege doesn't exist, why did Rachel Dolezal and Elizabeth Warren lie about their heritage to get ahead?

So if we're going to harp on the supposed injustices of "white privilege" we need to be fair and do the same with blatant minority privileges.

reply

[–] Keelai (36138) 5 years ago

The OP just dismissed over 400 years of white privilege negatively effecting the lives of millions of blacks by naming an unconnected example of two white people.

Rachel Dolezal has black siblings who she obviously admired to the point of wanting to be like them.

Elizabeth Warren's racist family couldn't accept someone who had a single Indian ancestor going back a few generations. She was made to feel nonwhite because of this. Look-up one-drop rule to understand the bigotry involved.

What is white privilege?

Those with white privilege are conditioned to be oblivious to its existence and take it for granted.

Daily effects of white privilege:

1. I can if I wish arrange to be in the company of people of my race most of the time.

2. I can avoid spending time with people whom I was trained to mistrust and who have learned to mistrust my kind or me.

3. If I should need to move, I can be pretty sure of renting or purchasing housing in an area which I can afford and in which I would want to live.

4. I can be pretty sure that my neighbors in such a location will be neutral or pleasant to me.

5. I can go shopping alone most of the time, pretty well assured that I will not be followed or harassed.

6. I can turn on the television or open to the front page of the paper and see people of my race widely represented.

7. When I am told about our national heritage or about "civilization," I am shown that people of my color made it what it is.

8. I can be sure that my children will be given curricular materials that testify to the existence of their race.

9. If I want to, I can be pretty sure of finding a publisher for this piece on white privilege.

10. I can be pretty sure of having my voice heard in a group in which I am the only member of my race.

11. I can be casual about whether or not to listen to another person's voice in a group in which s/he is the only member of his/her race.

reply

[–] Keelai (36138) 5 years ago

12. I can count on finding the music of my race represented, go into a supermarket and find the staple foods which fit with my cultural traditions, into a hairdresser's shop and find someone who can cut my hair.

13. Whether I use checks, credit cards or cash, I can count on my skin color not to work against the appearance of financial reliability.

14. I can arrange to protect my children most of the time from people who might not like them.

15. I do not have to educate my children to be aware of systemic racism for their own daily physical protection.

16. I can be pretty sure that my children's teachers and employers will tolerate them if they fit school and workplace norms; my chief worries about them do not concern others' attitudes toward their race.

17. I can talk with my mouth full and not have people put this down to my color.

18. I can swear, or dress in second hand clothes, or not answer letters, without having people attribute these choices to the bad morals, the poverty or the illiteracy of my race.

19. I can speak in public to a powerful male group without putting my race on trial.

20. I can do well in a challenging situation without being called a credit to my race.

21. I am never asked to speak for all the people of my racial group.

22. I can remain oblivious of the language and customs of persons of color who constitute the world's majority without feeling in my culture any penalty for such oblivion.

23. I can criticize our government and talk about how much I fear its policies and behavior without being seen as a cultural outsider.

24. I can be pretty sure that if I ask to talk to the "person in charge", I will be facing a person of my race.

25. If a traffic cop pulls me over or if the IRS audits my tax return, I can be sure I haven't been singled out because of my race.

26. I can easily buy posters, post-cards, picture books, greeting cards, dolls, toys and children's magazines featuring people of my race.

reply

[–] Keelai (36138) 5 years ago

27. I can go home from most meetings of organizations I belong to feeling somewhat tied in, rather than isolated, out-of-place, outnumbered, unheard, held at a distance or feared.

28. I can be pretty sure that an argument with a colleague of another race is more likely to jeopardize her/his chances for advancement than to jeopardize mine.

29. I can be pretty sure that if I argue for the promotion of a person of another race, or a program centering on race, this is not likely to cost me heavily within my present setting, even if my colleagues disagree with me.

30. If I declare there is a racial issue at hand, or there isn't a racial issue at hand, my race will lend me more credibility for either position than a person of color will have.

31. I can choose to ignore developments in minority writing and minority activist programs, or disparage them, or learn from them, but in any case, I can find ways to be more or less protected from negative consequences of any of these choices.

32. My culture gives me little fear about ignoring the perspectives and powers of people of other races.

33. I am not made acutely aware that my shape, bearing or body odor will be taken as a reflection on my race.

34. I can worry about racism without being seen as self-interested or self-seeking.

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

36. If my day, week or year is going badly, I need not ask of each negative episode or situation whether it had racial overtones.

37. I can be pretty sure of finding people who would be willing to talk with me and advise me about my next steps, professionally.

38. I can think over many options, social, political, imaginative or professional, without asking whether a person of my race would be accepted or allowed to do what I want to do.

39. I can be late to a meeting without having the lateness reflect on my race.

reply

[–] Keelai (36138) 5 years ago

40. I can choose public accommodation without fearing that people of my race cannot get in or will be mistreated in the places I have chosen.

41. I can be sure that if I need legal or medical help, my race will not work against me.

42. I can arrange my activities so that I will never have to experience feelings of rejection owing to my race.

43. If I have low credibility as a leader I can be sure that my race is not the problem.

44. I can easily find academic courses and institutions which give attention only to people of my race.

45. I can expect figurative language and imagery in all of the arts to testify to experiences of my race.

46. I can chose blemish cover or bandages in "flesh" color and have them more or less match my skin.

47. I can travel alone or with my spouse without expecting embarrassment or hostility in those who deal with us.

48. I have no difficulty finding neighborhoods where people approve of our household.

49. My children are given texts and classes which implicitly support our kind of family unit and do not turn them against my choice of domestic partnership.

50. I will feel welcomed and "normal" in the usual walks of public life, institutional and social.

reply

[–] sut6432 (2928) 5 years ago

The amount of completely ridiculous generalizations you just threw out there is so staggering it's scary. And people really buy into this shit???

Do you enjoy living life generalizing everything and everyone?

Do you believe that there are different individual characteristics of people other than race? Or do you have people fall right in line by their race, saying "you're this color, this should happen to you, and this is how you're supposed to act. No exceptions."

You give the term "victim mentality" a whole new meaning. You broke the mold of victim mentality. That list of complete generalizations is hysterical, and if you wanted to you could apply those to any group of people for any number of different reasons.

And #46...flesh colored bandages??? Really??? I really hope this is a joke, and someone didn't seriously call out the color of bandages as racial oppression.

Hey, here's another one you can add. 51) Toilet Paper...it's white most of the time. Those racist bastards who created toilet paper must be brought to justice by any means necessary!

I have lost any hope for the HUMAN race after reading those last few posts. Lol. I feel bad that people go though life like that. Waking up every day thinking of nothing but the race of every person they see, and getting pissed at band aids for being "flesh" colored. Lol. It's gotta be a miserable feeling.

Just wow.

This is coming from someone who knows fully well racism does exist, and it's terrible, but my god, how far over the top and to the extreme can someone take what is actually considered racism?

I'm sorry, band aids are not racist man.

Best of luck to you in your war to make EVERYTHING about racial oppression.

reply

[–] TheHungryHippo (821) 5 years ago

The fact that the left thinks they can just assume that somehow has this so called "white privilege" merely because of their skin color is making huge leaps in logic and assumptions not backed up by any kind of data or analysis. In order for someone to conclude I have "white privilege" they would have to know pretty much my whole backstory. It sounds to me it's the left who have the problem with race.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

Of course "white privilege" is a BS concept as we've established in past threads even if one is talking about previous eras where a minority really was discriminated against. It's misleading and insidious to describe the default norm as a racial "privilege".

It's even more inane to use the phrase now, when most racial discrimination and bigotry is anti-white. For example no other race has their normal designation used as a negative or epithet like "white" is. Many have become so conditioned to viewing "white" as negative that liberal reporters and politicians mindlessly use it in knee jerk fashion even in non-racial situations, like when they kept attacking the Senators questioning Kavanaugh's accuser as a bunch of "white" men, despite her being white too. Only bigots and morons use the phrase "white privilege" non-ironically.

reply

[–] Keelai (36138) 5 years ago

You're confused. Obviously, you don't know the definition. I suggest you read my former post to get an understanding of the term rather than holding on to your ignorance.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

I suggest you stop preaching on topics you're ignorant of, spend a decade intensely studying, and come back when you possess the mental acuity to substantively address posts you reply to instead of typing the weak BS you just did.

reply

[–] Keelai (36138) 5 years ago

Personal insults rather than a true discussion on the definition of white privilege demonstrates your ignorance and your desire to spread bigotry and prejudice rather than engaging in an open dialogue with an exchange of ideas.

White privilege defined with an example:

White privilege is buying a band-aid and expecting the color to match your own. Even using the term "flesh color" has origins in white privilege since you discount the majority of the world's population with ease and believe it's natural for "flesh color" to mean only yours. Discounting most of the world or people of color in the the U.S. is also white privilege since you feel that you don't have to think about people unlike yourself and find their lack of having a "flesh colored" bandage that reflects their skin color to be something you believe is unimportant.

Any of the above behaviors by you means that you have taken advantage of white privilege. That's just scratching the surface.

Anyway, my former post is not actually mine. Instead, it's a classic essay written by Peggy McIntosh titled, “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack” published in 1988.
https://mlp.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/mcintosh.pdf

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

Defining solely from example is more of a half-assed attempt at expressionist art than a rational exchange of ideas. You're a deranged, malicious, serial liar and partisan bottom feeder who's truly ignorant on every topic I've seen you post about. I'm not surprised at all that you try to get away with copy-pasting something you only belatedly attribute.

The asinine band aid example just shows that most Americans are white. That's all. There's nothing "privileged" or sinister about that, any more than there is about virtually everyone on tv in China being Chinese. Short people of all colors have it way worse than non-whites, all else being equal, yet we don't have to hear endless propagandizing about "height privilege". In fact the whole concept of "white privilege" is bigoted and insidious because you're using people's skin color as a weapon against them. The actual racial discrimination of our era is mostly anti-white, at the institutional level (e.g. affirmative action, NFL Rooney rule, one sided social media policies) and with societal double standards (e.g. using "white" as a negative; attacking so called "white advocacy" as "racist" when they use word for word the same language as widely praised non-white advocacy groups with only the color changed, relentless racial bashing rather than the self esteem boosting of chauvinistic items like "Black History Month", "Black Entertainment Channel", Latino Pride events).

The right way forward is to end racial discrimination, treat skin colors equally, and treat people as individuals, discouraging racial divisions rather than seeking to permanently entrench them.

reply

[–] Keelai (36138) 5 years ago

You have just demonstrated your use of your white privilege by casually discounting 60+ million Americans and most of the world population who are not Caucasian. Band-aids are a global product.

You continue to show your white privilege by easily accepting that "flesh color" band-aids can only mean a skin tone associated with whites. It never occurs to you that flesh tone could easily be called pink, fair or another neutral name. It never occurs to you that people in the U.S. and globally have many skin tones and several different band-aid colors could've been created like pink, brown, olive, dark brown instead of defaulting to a Caucasian skin tone. The above never occurs to you because you accept and expect white privilege.

You continue to demonstrate your white privilege by expecting entertainment, events and education to center around only whites instead of them reflecting the larger diversified American population. Your anger at diversity shows your biased attitude steeped in white privilege that everything should revolve around whites only and if it doesn't then there is something wrong. You believe if nonwhites would accept a white only viewpoint of the world then all would be well.

reply

[–] Keelai (36138) 5 years ago

Your last post demonstrates your white privilege in these points from Peggy McIntosh's essay:

6. I can turn on the television or open to the front page of the paper and see people of my race widely represented.

7. When I am told about our national heritage or about "civilization," I am shown that people of my color made it what it is.

8. I can be sure that my children will be given curricular materials that testify to the existence of their race.

22. I can remain oblivious of the language and customs of persons of color who constitute the world's majority without feeling in my culture any penalty for such oblivion.

31. I can choose to ignore developments in minority writing and minority activist programs, or disparage them, or learn from them, but in any case, I can find ways to be more or less protected from negative consequences of any of these choices.

32. My culture gives me little fear about ignoring the perspectives and powers of people of other races.

46. I can chose blemish cover or bandages in "flesh" color and have them more or less match my skin.

50. I will feel welcomed and "normal" in the usual walks of public life, institutional and social.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

No, but you're continuing to fully indulge in your moron privilege. Band aids come in all sorts of colors and sometimes include cartoon characters. It's not a big deal. My point was that the reason they initially called that beige color "skin" was because those products were made in and for a mostly white country. Over 2 decades ago someone launched "Ebon-Aid" marketed to blacks. Walmart and other stores agreed to carry it but it tanked. A few people bought it as a political statement but that was it. Turns out even most minority consumers don't care much about a band aid's color, though other companies are trying again today by offering all skin colors.

And while they long ago stopped calling that crayon color "flesh", it's no more damaging for a non-white kid to see the word "flesh" attached to a different color than it is for a Caucasian or some other minority to live in a place like China or Zimbabwe and be aware of the fact that he's a racial minority. That's only a problem if you're brainwashing kids into obsessing over race.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

Peggy's "essay" (really?) shows her gross ignorance of what's actually taught in schools, shown on tv, and her own shallow racial bigotry. Her assumptions were already dated at best by 1988 and are laughably anachronistic now, as anyone can see by flipping around tv channels, listening to music radio stations, or cracking open textbooks. And yet the racial whining has only gotten worse. She also commits numerous basic logical fallacies. For example:

1. I can if I wish arrange to be in the company of people of my race most of the time.

So can other races, genius. In fact minorities do it more often and are cheered when they establish racial/ethnic oriented organizations, while whites are prevented and/or excoriated if they’re even suspected of secretly trying to do the same thing. Leftists have encouraged racial division and entrenchment to the point where at some of the most “progressive” schools non-white groups are demanding to hold their own, separate graduation ceremonies.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/02/us/black-commencement-harvard.html

https://www.thecollegefix.com/trending-segregated-grad-ceremonies-blacks-native-americans-undocumented-students-lgbtq/

The rest of your post is also baseless lies and idiocy. You bigots need to stop projecting your hang ups onto everyone else. Peggy's outrage over seeing facts about the history of Western Civilization, and her takeaway being skin color instead of important cultural traits, principles, ideas, etc., is quite telling and sends the wrong message about what’s important for people to focus on.

reply

[–] Keelai (36138) 5 years ago

"So can other races,

That's a white skin privilege attitude. I know many people of different races and ethnicities who are isolated from people like themselves. For instance, how many Koreans are in your neighborhood? If a Korean family moves there, they will be isolated. How many East Indians work with you. If one is hired, they will be isolated. One of my friends told me how normal it was for her to be isolated in her job, school, and social activities. Her boyfriend was white and they would go places where she would be the only nonwhite there. I used to listen to a Native-American radio program and he used talk about how there may be only a dozen or less people left alive in a tribe. Isolation was normal for them and their tribe was going to die out soon.

Your lack of knowledge about this proves you're living in a white skin privilege bubble.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

They're only "isolated" if the only variable you care about is race. You're living in a racially bigoted bubble.

reply

[–] Keelai (36138) 5 years ago

Try to keep up! The topic is white privilege which is about race therefore they are isolated, by your own admission.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

Wrong. They're not isolated if you view them through the categorical lens of male, female, local geography, religion, career field, interests, favorite sports team, and/or an endless number of other variables. We're only talking about the BS myth of "white privilege" because partisans like you feel you have to keep people divided and resentful for political manipulation and exploitation, and you're so shallow and bigoted that you feel skin color is your best option.

You try to keep up. My post was only one line and you still failed to comprehend it before replying.

reply

[–] Keelai (36138) 5 years ago

Deflection.

The topic is race and white privilege.

You lost this round.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

No, you're deflecting from my point about your narrow racial prism. I've dismantled every point you've made. You've lost this match.

reply

[–] Keelai (36138) 5 years ago

"They're only "isolated" if the only variable you care about is race."

Your words. The topic is race therefore you admit that they are isolated. Stand down!

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

The topic is your misguided racial obsession.

reply

[–] Keelai (36138) 5 years ago

Deflection and insult. No argument left. Just lashing out in a last attempt to save face.

I'll consider your lack of an intelligent response as your lack of intelligence and a surrender. Stand down!

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

Your latest defeat is causing you to have a meltdown.

reply

[–] Keelai (36138) 5 years ago

I'll leave you to your rant.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

Your first post in a while without an exclamation mark. Good. That's progress.

reply

[–] Keelai (36138) 5 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Keelai (36138) 5 years ago

You're trying to justify white privilege.

I was in a pharmacy today. Only flesh-colored band-aids sold. It's rare to find anything else. Those band-aids were never widely sold even in diversified areas.

Nigeria is the largest country in Africa. 201 million people with only 50k who are nonblack. Look at this band-aid at an online Nigerian pharmacy: https://www.jumia.com.ng/nafs-100pcs-baby-kids-family-essential-band-aid-adhesive-bandage-25395630.html
White skin privilege is when you can go to a majority black country and still find "flesh-color" band-aids.

Full page shows only Caucasian models and one Asian model. No black models. More white skin privilege and the website is in English rather than any of the indigenous languages.
https://www.jumia.com.ng/bandages-bandaging-supplies/

You're the one who cries if you see a nonwhite starring in a mainstream movie instead of a white person which is more white skin privilege. I repeatedly read comments criticizing that on this site.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

Those band-aids were never widely sold even in diversified areas.

That's what I said, halfwit. You're crying about non-white band aids that most non-whites didn't care enough about to buy.

White skin privilege is when you can go to a majority black country and still find "flesh-color" band-aids.

It's hilarious that you're attacking white people for having the gall to invent and then provide band aids to foreign countries that are either unable or uninterested in making their own though. Instead of whining about non-existent "privilege", perhaps the appropriate response is gratitude. No one is being forced to buy or use the band aids. Apparently people like them though.

You're the one who cries if you see a nonwhite starring in a mainstream movie instead of a white person which is more white skin privilege.

Liar. You're the one crying about some non-existent lack of representation on tv. Whites are underrepresented if anything. Non-whites even have their own tv channels (what kind of privilege is this? https://www.bet.com/)

I oppose one sided leftist and identity politics dominating entertainment. If every white actor and writer was fired and replaced with black people or Asian chicks for that matter, and roughly half of the new characters and/or writers were conservative, I'd see it as a massive improvement.

Full page shows only Caucasian models and one Asian model. No black models. More white skin privilege and the website is in English rather than any of the indigenous languages.
https://www.jumia.com.ng/bandages-bandaging-supplies/

Here you go. All black models.

https://trucolourbandages.com/

Will you stop crying now?

reply

[–] Keelai (36138) 5 years ago

One cannot buy band-aids that were never available for sale in the stores. I live in a very diversified area and I never saw them in any of the dozens of pharmacies throughout my area.

Yes, a white-owned company with a long history of discrimination hired a white man to invent a product designed for white people and effectively ignored a large percentage of the American population and most of the world's. You just described more white privilege.

Hundreds of white stations and you're crying about BET which is also white-owned?

Your white privilege is that you can conveniently walk into ANY pharmacy in the country and buy "flesh-colored" band-aids for a few dollars, but you expect people of color to special order them for 14x the amount of money.

You oppose nonwhites being shown on TV because:

6. I can turn on the television or open to the front page of the paper and see people of my race widely represented.

That's your white privilege showing up again.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

Every line of your post was a lie, from the band aid stuff you're still hilariously crying about instead of showing gratitude for (man, could you imagine if a filmmaker had the courage to make a brutally honest documentary called "A Day Without White People?")...

...to there being "hundreds of white stations" (there are zero stations celebrating whiteness, no "White History Month", no "White Pride" parades, no white pageants or award shows, and if someone tweets something as innocuous as "white people are awesome" Twitter will likely suspend his account; whose privilege is that?)...

...to you ignoring me pointing out that the "ebony" band aids were sold at Walmart and other large chains (unless you lived in one of those rabidly leftist neighborhoods that stupidly held protests to keep Walmart out)...

...to you repeating your lie about me somehow opposing non-whites on tv when I just said I wouldn't care if everyone on tv was non-white as long a bunch of them were conservative (would be a big improvement over the status quo)...

...to your lie about "white privilege" existing when that idiocy has been thoroughly debunked.

reply

[–] Keelai (36138) 5 years ago

"white privilege" has been thoroughly debunked. "

Only in your mind. Racists always deny racism. Everything you described centers around white people and culture. the word "white" doesn't have to be used because it is considered the norm or default the same way flesh color means Caucasian skin tone.

At this point, you're just doubling down on your stupidity.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

Aside from "white privilege" being debunked on definitional grounds, by the logic of your moronic premise that being in a minority automatically makes one oppressed, then you should also be talking about dark hair privilege (poor blondes and red heads; how traumatic being constantly reminded of their minority status), regular height privilege, overweight privilege (these days at least; poor skinny and fit people), middle class privilege (poor rich people), etc., or for that matter the oppressed whites of South Africa (actually they are oppressed now, but they used to be the oppressors despite being the minority, further obliterating your premise).

And no, aside from the fact the dumbed down New Left drivel passing for much of history "education" these days explicitly features identity politics (bashing whites and promoting everyone else as victims or heroes), there's a qualitative difference between most people involved in a book, parade, tv show, etc. merely happening to be white and the event promoting white chauvinism the way black/Hispanic pride events promote black/Hispanic chauvinism. Even "white studies" classes at college are all about bashing whites rather than building them up the way "ethnic studies" classes do for other groups.

When you've got whites like Rosanna Arquette literally apologizing for being white....

https://www.redstate.com/alexparker/2019/08/07/rosanna-arquette-apologizes-for-being-born-white-she-announces-her-shame-disgust-over-her-birth/

...and millions of non-whites breaking laws to get into this country, it's clear there is no "white privilege". It's a shame you lack the mental acuity to truly engage on these issues.

reply

[–] Keelai (36138) 5 years ago

Redstate?

Extreme right-wing propaganda:

"Overall, we rate RedState borderline Questionable and strongly Right Biased, based on story selection that always favors the right and use of emotionally loaded (sensationalized) headlines. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to poor sourcing of information and a few failed fact checks."
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/red-state/

You lose IQ points going on sites like that which explains a lot.

reply

[–] Keelai (36138) 5 years ago

"The right way forward is to end racial discrimination, treat skin colors equally, and treat people as individuals, discouraging racial divisions rather than seeking to permanently entrench them. "

White privilege is when a mall hires a Santa Claus who is a person of color and whites complain.

White privilege is believing a WASPy Jesus painting is accurate even though Caucasians didn't live in that part of the world during that time period. Or assuming that God is an elderly white man with a beard.

White privilege is watching a western with only white cowboys and believing it's accurate even though 1/3 of cowboys were black or Mexican.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

I've never heard anyone complain about a black Santa, though he is an established white figure (and even the historical Saint Nicholas was of Greek ancestry), so by your logic it's black privilege that some white, Asian, or Hispanic guy isn't cast to play Shaft or Shaka Zulu.

You don't even know what the word "Caucasian" means. Racial boundaries vary by classification system, but in some of the major ones Middle Easterners have been counted as "Caucasian". I won't even get into the actual ethnography of the period (the region was "whiter" millennia ago with multiple massive Indo European migrations than it has been for most of the past few centuries; animal populations were different too; there really were lions, bears, and stuff at the crossroads of those three continents back then). Regardless, what you call the "WASPy Jesus" depiction, which actually could be a Jewish carpenter, isn't that far from the Shroud of Turin image, and became standardized as early 300, when Anglo Saxons were still pagan barbarians (so you can't blame them).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depiction_of_Jesus#/media/File:Christ_with_beard.jpg

And cowboys' ethnicity varied by location and crew. You really are too ignorant to be trying to preach on any of these topics. You also dodged my question below in cowardly fashion.

reply

[–] Keelai (36138) 5 years ago

Your white privilege has popped up again! St Nicholas was born in Myra which is modern day Demre in Southern Turkey located in Asia Minor. Their origins are from Central Asia. The Greeks only colonized the area, but St. Nicholas wasn't ethnically Greek. Racially, he would be considered Asiatic.

"And cowboys' ethnicity varied by location and crew"

Congratulatons! You just made your stupidest comment yet. Cattle drives went through several states. Black and Mexican cowboys worked and lived throughout the Old West which is never reflected in any old western movie. Name a few prior to the 1960s (Civil Rights Era) which reflects reality and not a racist fantasy.

"the region was "whiter" millennia ago "

I stand corrected. You outdid yourself and made an even stupider comment than your last. What nonsense!

Scientists have described Jews two millenia ago, including Jesus, as being curly haired, stocky with dark skin.

Some Jews immigrated to Europe and intermarried which is why they look more European than the Jews who stayed in the region. Shroud of Turin is a hoax. Do you believe in Big Foot, too?

From an evolutionary point of view, white-skinned people wouldn't thrive in a hot desert. The light skin would burn easily and become diseased with cancer. Melanin protects against the sun which is why you find darker-skinned people originating in areas with hot climates.

Ditto the Ancient Egyptians who always painted themselves with brown skin. They were an Afro-Asiatic people, but you wouldn't know it from all the WASPs who portray them in movies. And I'm sure you wouldn't know that since you live in a world of denial and ignorance in order to keep your white privlege mindset intact.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

[deleted]

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

"Nicholas was born in the city of Patara..., a port on the Mediterranean Sea, in Asia Minor in the Roman Empire, to a wealthy family of Greek Christians.[23]"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Nicholas

The "Asiatic" Turks wouldn't sweep in and conquer Asia Minor for 7 more centuries. As a "crossroads" the region contained all sorts of ethnicities in ancient times, many of them Indo-European groups that had invaded or colonized from the north, from Hittites to Lydians to Celtic Gauls (the province of "Galatia") to Armenians to Greeks. The Greek language was ubiquitous there by Nicholas' time in the 3rd Century. Just stop trying to preach on topics you know nothing about, Keelai. You're embarrassing yourself.

Did you even look at the circa AD 300 painting of Jesus I linked for you? While you're a moron who knows nothing about history, anthropology, or biology, do your eyes at least work? And do your flickering synapses possess enough spark to realize that Anglo Saxons (aka "WASPs"), who were still pagan barbarians at the time (and certainly weren't Protestant, lol), didn't paint the image? Actually the documented fact that depictions of Jesus became standardized around that time, and just happen to look like the Shroud of Turin, is a piece of evidence that it's legit. Not absolute proof, but interesting evidence.

If you have to stick with pre-1960 movies you've already lost that meaningless tangent too. I'll mercifully pass over the bigoted ignorance in your arm chair racial analysis (though I'll point out that whites have fared pretty well in deserts, from Australia to Africa to North America).

Egyptians are depicted as light brown in ancient pictures and most movies I've seen. What are stupid are shows or music videos that depict them as sub Saharan Africans (black). They were not.

Your "white privlege" (sic) BS was debunked. I'm not sure what your point even is now. You're just spewing random idiocy on various topics and vague racial whining.

reply

[–] Keelai (36138) 5 years ago

You're trying to prove that whites are dominant which is a part of the white privilege attitude that I have been describing. You have just proved that I am correct.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

No, I just proved that you have no idea what you're talking about on any of these topics and that you've been exhibiting that moron privilege I mentioned earlier.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

Racists always deny racism.

Does that mean you're admitting your racism? Great piece of logic there, btw, let me tell you. Leftist arguments aren't built to code any more than the Soviet Union was.

reply

[–] ultravioletx (10237) 5 years ago

Trumpers need to come up with a new routine. When someone calls you racist, and you turn around and call your accuser racist, you've lost the battle.

Trumpers try to play the hand that the label of racism is too easily thrown around. So when a Trumper tries to throw it back at the accuser, it holds no weight.

The tribalism we are seeing under Trump may not be racism in your view, but it is a tribalism never seen before so racism fits the bill to a lot of onlookers including many onlookers on the right who are greatly dissatisfied with Trump's rhetoric.

On top of that we have brown-skinned people in cages at the border, and Trump calling for an end to birthright citizenship. We get it. Trump and many GOPers want to limit votes for Democrats because those darn Dems are growing faster than Repubs. But doubling down on Trumpian tribalism is not the winning strategy.

But of course, this is just an anonymous message board. This is not where you come to hear about what is or isn't a winning strategy. This is where you come to vent your frustration that democrats are constantly gaining ground. This is where you get to fantasize about silly things such as Trump becoming president indefinitely.

Good luck with all of that :)

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

Leftist bigotry is exhibited in your racial obsession and embrace of identity politics, and I cited numerous specific examples on this thread and elsewhere. It long predates Trump, genius. You and your witless comrade lose the battle by baselessly calling people who favor a color blind society "racist". Plus in the post you replied to I was actually exposing the fatal flaw in his insipid argument, which should be obvious to anyone with a triple digit IQ since I explicitly said so.

Calling people "racist". Talk about needing to get a new playbook, LOL. Accusing most of the country of being "racist" hasn't worked so well for Democrats, especially in battleground states.

The rest of your post is too stupid and off topic to merit a response.

reply

[–] ultravioletx (10237) 5 years ago

Thats not what bigotry is.

The right-wing put up their pitchforks to prevent interracial marriage. They lost.
The right-wing put up their pitchforks to prevent civil rights. They lost.
The right-wing put up their pitchforks to prevent gay marriage. They lost.
Now the right-wing is putting up their pitchforks to prevent trans rights.

Since the right-wing is struggling to score a victory on these fronts, they claim their failure is because they are victims of bigotry.

Yes. Repubs really are that stupid.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

Actually liberal Democrats (and black nationalists like Malcolm X and Muhammad Ali) opposed interracial marriage. Your comrades lost.

Liberal Democrats opposed civil rights. Your comrades lost.

Democrats dehumanized blacks to justify slavery "rights", prioritizing convenience for some over human rights. Your party lost.

Democrats dehumanize unborn children to justify abortion, prioritizing convenience for some over the right to life. Hopefully some day your party loses on that too. (the actual biggest issue of our time)

Redefining marriage isn't equivalent to fighting racial segregation, and skin color isn't sexual behavior. Traditional marriage supporters (which included most blacks, for what it's worth) won virtually every vote on the issue from California to Maine. It was activist liberal judges who gutted any real meaning to marriage, with flake Kennedy writing the worst, stupidest, most unconstitutional decision I've ever read.

Whereas MLK argued for a color blind future where men are judged by the "content of their character" rather than their skin color, the conservative position, liberals have taken the opposite approach of intersectionality and identity politics to judge people entirely by their skin color, discriminate, and establish different rules for different races, seeking to permanently entrench racial divisions.

Leftists use people's skin color against them as a weapon, not just whites' but minorities'. Look at the disgusting vile they spew at minority conservatives, or the liberal protesters screaming the "n" word at the black cop in that video I posted in the Antifa discussions. They even write books about "policing racial loyalty" and defending use of the nasty epithet "Uncle Tom" to attack those who deviate from the party line.

"In Defense of Uncle Tom: Why Blacks Must Police Racial Loyalty"

https://www.amazon.com/Defense-Uncle-Tom-Blacks-Loyalty/dp/1107668344

That's bigotry defined.

reply

[–] Keelai (36138) 5 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ultravioletx (10237) 5 years ago

"If "white privilege" actually existed..."

There would be a thread pondering the hypothetical reality of white privilege.

If white privilege didn't exist, nobody would bother.

reply

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

^ More of that awesome liberal "logic" on display, ladies and gentleman. Wow. I guess ultravioletx believes 9/11 was an inside job, Obama was born in Kenya, and countless other things whose "hypothetical reality" has been posted about across the internet.

reply