Concept of White Privilege is Racist

[Correll]

Sure it did, and you know it.

Produce the evidence you have been asked to produce. That 1989 study did not produce shit. In fact somce the study was actually done in 1989:

Study: anti-black hiring discrimination is as prevalent today as it was in 1989

Americans are as racist as they were back in the late 1980s — at least in one crucial area: jobs.

A new study, by researchers at Northwestern University, Harvard, and the Institute for Social Research in Norway, looked at every available field experiment on hiring discrimination from 1989 through 2015. The researchers found that anti-black racism in hiring is unchanged since at least 1989, while anti-Latino racism may have decreased modestly.

They looked at two kinds of experiments: résumé and in-person audits. In the first, researchers send out résumés with similar levels of education, experience, and so on, but the names differ so some résumés have a stereotypically black or Latino name and the others have a stereotypically white name. In the second, applicants go in-person to apply for a job; they each share similar qualifications, but some are white while others are black or brown.

In total, the researchers produced 24 studies with 30 estimates of discrimination for black and Latino Americans, collectively representing more than 54,000 applications submitted for more than 25,000 positions.

They concluded that, on average, “white applicants receive 36% more callbacks than equally qualified African Americans” while “[w]hite applicants receive on average 24% more callbacks than Latinos.”

Study: anti-black hiring discrimination is as prevalent today as it was in 1989

It's time you learned a hard lesson. And the more you argue the worse it's going to get for you.

Sorry, considering your dishonesty with the studies I've posted in the past, you don't have the credibility for me to look at your studies.


Besides, I know that anything I say that is not a mea culpa will just be dismissed by you.

you've never posted any "studies" that were legitimate.

Of course I did.

Are you actually denying the well known fact that there is wide spread discrimination in Ivy League admissions in FAVOR of blacks at the cost of whites?

Because it's false

Have you ever been on an Ivy League campus?

No, I have not.


But the studies clearly show a 300 point discrimination in favor of students that have black skin.

 

[Correll]

Sure it did, and you know it.

Produce the evidence you have been asked to produce. That 1989 study did not produce shit. In fact somce the study was actually done in 1989:

Study: anti-black hiring discrimination is as prevalent today as it was in 1989

Americans are as racist as they were back in the late 1980s — at least in one crucial area: jobs.

A new study, by researchers at Northwestern University, Harvard, and the Institute for Social Research in Norway, looked at every available field experiment on hiring discrimination from 1989 through 2015. The researchers found that anti-black racism in hiring is unchanged since at least 1989, while anti-Latino racism may have decreased modestly.

They looked at two kinds of experiments: résumé and in-person audits. In the first, researchers send out résumés with similar levels of education, experience, and so on, but the names differ so some résumés have a stereotypically black or Latino name and the others have a stereotypically white name. In the second, applicants go in-person to apply for a job; they each share similar qualifications, but some are white while others are black or brown.

In total, the researchers produced 24 studies with 30 estimates of discrimination for black and Latino Americans, collectively representing more than 54,000 applications submitted for more than 25,000 positions.

They concluded that, on average, “white applicants receive 36% more callbacks than equally qualified African Americans” while “[w]hite applicants receive on average 24% more callbacks than Latinos.”

Study: anti-black hiring discrimination is as prevalent today as it was in 1989

It's time you learned a hard lesson. And the more you argue the worse it's going to get for you.

Sorry, considering your dishonesty with the studies I've posted in the past, you don't have the credibility for me to look at your studies.


Besides, I know that anything I say that is not a mea culpa will just be dismissed by you.

you've never posted any "studies" that were legitimate.

Of course I did.

Are you actually denying the well known fact that there is wide spread discrimination in Ivy League admissions in FAVOR of blacks at the cost of whites?

There is no such discrimination. And still that doesn't male a case for your claim of national anti white discrimination.

Yes there is, and yes it does.

 

[Correll]

Says the black man discounting the experiences of the white man.

Actually I have been taught all about the experiences of the white man. So shut up and produce the evidence of that national policy of racial discrimination against whites in the areas I asked you to.

Oh, so NOW, reading and hearing about something is a way to learn about something you don't personally know?

Is this something new, cause the other day you were pretty harsh with someone for supposedly discounting your experiences.


Or, is it, like everything else for libs, different rules based on skin color?


White people can't know about black experiences, but black people can know about whites?



Or do you just say whatever shit feels right in the moment, and are shocked each time someone points our the contradictions?

I know personally that very well qualified backs have been denied jobs for decades for less qualified dumb ass whites. We know about white experiences because we earn about them in school and socially because the majority of people here are white dumb ass! You keep trying to use false equivalences to build strawman after strawman. Produce the evidence of that national policy of racial discrimination against whites in the areas I asked you to.

Considering your blatant dishonesty when it comes to proportions, your claims are dismissed.


My experiences stand. You can't understand them because you are not white.

Well I can understand and you are lying. What you need to get is that your use of proportion is what's dishonest. You keep running from my request because you cannot show us a national policy of racial discrimination against white people. You can't do it. You lose little boy.

Nothing dishonest about pointing out the universities that have to discriminate against whites and asians in order to get more blacks in are practicing discrimination,

even though whites are still in the majority of their student body.


They have to discriminate to get even the number of blacks they do have, because their goals, ie representative blacks, ignores the reality of poor black academics.


Thus the number you should be looking at to see lack of discrimination is not the proportion of blacks in the nation,

but the proportion of blacks in the potential student body with competitive academic achievement.


Which is obviously far, far lower.

 

[Correll]

Produce the evidence you have been asked to produce. That 1989 study did not produce shit. In fact somce the study was actually done in 1989:

Study: anti-black hiring discrimination is as prevalent today as it was in 1989

Americans are as racist as they were back in the late 1980s — at least in one crucial area: jobs.

A new study, by researchers at Northwestern University, Harvard, and the Institute for Social Research in Norway, looked at every available field experiment on hiring discrimination from 1989 through 2015. The researchers found that anti-black racism in hiring is unchanged since at least 1989, while anti-Latino racism may have decreased modestly.

They looked at two kinds of experiments: résumé and in-person audits. In the first, researchers send out résumés with similar levels of education, experience, and so on, but the names differ so some résumés have a stereotypically black or Latino name and the others have a stereotypically white name. In the second, applicants go in-person to apply for a job; they each share similar qualifications, but some are white while others are black or brown.

In total, the researchers produced 24 studies with 30 estimates of discrimination for black and Latino Americans, collectively representing more than 54,000 applications submitted for more than 25,000 positions.

They concluded that, on average, “white applicants receive 36% more callbacks than equally qualified African Americans” while “[w]hite applicants receive on average 24% more callbacks than Latinos.”

Study: anti-black hiring discrimination is as prevalent today as it was in 1989

It's time you learned a hard lesson. And the more you argue the worse it's going to get for you.

Sorry, considering your dishonesty with the studies I've posted in the past, you don't have the credibility for me to look at your studies.


Besides, I know that anything I say that is not a mea culpa will just be dismissed by you.

you've never posted any "studies" that were legitimate.

Of course I did.

Are you actually denying the well known fact that there is wide spread discrimination in Ivy League admissions in FAVOR of blacks at the cost of whites?

Because it's false

Have you ever been on an Ivy League campus?

I doubt if he ever has. He posted up a 1989 study and makes a claim.

SO post a later study refuting the study I posted, or admit that the numbers and the discrimination are real.

 

[IM2]

Actually I have been taught all about the experiences of the white man. So shut up and produce the evidence of that national policy of racial discrimination against whites in the areas I asked you to.

Oh, so NOW, reading and hearing about something is a way to learn about something you don't personally know?

Is this something new, cause the other day you were pretty harsh with someone for supposedly discounting your experiences.


Or, is it, like everything else for libs, different rules based on skin color?


White people can't know about black experiences, but black people can know about whites?



Or do you just say whatever shit feels right in the moment, and are shocked each time someone points our the contradictions?

I know personally that very well qualified backs have been denied jobs for decades for less qualified dumb ass whites. We know about white experiences because we earn about them in school and socially because the majority of people here are white dumb ass! You keep trying to use false equivalences to build strawman after strawman. Produce the evidence of that national policy of racial discrimination against whites in the areas I asked you to.

Considering your blatant dishonesty when it comes to proportions, your claims are dismissed.


My experiences stand. You can't understand them because you are not white.

Well I can understand and you are lying. What you need to get is that your use of proportion is what's dishonest. You keep running from my request because you cannot show us a national policy of racial discrimination against white people. You can't do it. You lose little boy.

Nothing dishonest about pointing out the universities that have to discriminate against whites and asians in order to get more blacks in are practicing discrimination,

even though whites are still in the majority of their student body.


They have to discriminate to get even the number of blacks they do have, because their goals, ie representative blacks, ignores the reality of poor black academics.


Thus the number you should be looking at to see lack of discrimination is not the proportion of blacks in the nation,

but the proportion of blacks in the potential student body with competitive academic achievement.


Which is obviously far, far lower.

It's dishonest when that doesn't happen.

 

[IM2]

Sorry, considering your dishonesty with the studies I've posted in the past, you don't have the credibility for me to look at your studies.


Besides, I know that anything I say that is not a mea culpa will just be dismissed by you.

you've never posted any "studies" that were legitimate.

Of course I did.

Are you actually denying the well known fact that there is wide spread discrimination in Ivy League admissions in FAVOR of blacks at the cost of whites?

Because it's false

Have you ever been on an Ivy League campus?

I doubt if he ever has. He posted up a 1989 study and makes a claim.

SO post a later study refuting the study I posted, or admit that the numbers and the discrimination are real.

No. YOU produce evidence of a national policy of racial discrimination against whites in all the areas I detailed.

 

[IM2]

Produce the evidence you have been asked to produce. That 1989 study did not produce shit. In fact somce the study was actually done in 1989:

Study: anti-black hiring discrimination is as prevalent today as it was in 1989

Americans are as racist as they were back in the late 1980s — at least in one crucial area: jobs.

A new study, by researchers at Northwestern University, Harvard, and the Institute for Social Research in Norway, looked at every available field experiment on hiring discrimination from 1989 through 2015. The researchers found that anti-black racism in hiring is unchanged since at least 1989, while anti-Latino racism may have decreased modestly.

They looked at two kinds of experiments: résumé and in-person audits. In the first, researchers send out résumés with similar levels of education, experience, and so on, but the names differ so some résumés have a stereotypically black or Latino name and the others have a stereotypically white name. In the second, applicants go in-person to apply for a job; they each share similar qualifications, but some are white while others are black or brown.

In total, the researchers produced 24 studies with 30 estimates of discrimination for black and Latino Americans, collectively representing more than 54,000 applications submitted for more than 25,000 positions.

They concluded that, on average, “white applicants receive 36% more callbacks than equally qualified African Americans” while “[w]hite applicants receive on average 24% more callbacks than Latinos.”

Study: anti-black hiring discrimination is as prevalent today as it was in 1989

It's time you learned a hard lesson. And the more you argue the worse it's going to get for you.

Sorry, considering your dishonesty with the studies I've posted in the past, you don't have the credibility for me to look at your studies.


Besides, I know that anything I say that is not a mea culpa will just be dismissed by you.

you've never posted any "studies" that were legitimate.

Of course I did.

Are you actually denying the well known fact that there is wide spread discrimination in Ivy League admissions in FAVOR of blacks at the cost of whites?

Because it's false

Have you ever been on an Ivy League campus?

No, I have not.


But the studies clearly show a 300 point discrimination in favor of students that have black skin.

Actually they show that thee are more whites than everyone else in those ivy league schools.

 

[IM2]

Produce the evidence you have been asked to produce. That 1989 study did not produce shit. In fact somce the study was actually done in 1989:

Study: anti-black hiring discrimination is as prevalent today as it was in 1989

Americans are as racist as they were back in the late 1980s — at least in one crucial area: jobs.

A new study, by researchers at Northwestern University, Harvard, and the Institute for Social Research in Norway, looked at every available field experiment on hiring discrimination from 1989 through 2015. The researchers found that anti-black racism in hiring is unchanged since at least 1989, while anti-Latino racism may have decreased modestly.

They looked at two kinds of experiments: résumé and in-person audits. In the first, researchers send out résumés with similar levels of education, experience, and so on, but the names differ so some résumés have a stereotypically black or Latino name and the others have a stereotypically white name. In the second, applicants go in-person to apply for a job; they each share similar qualifications, but some are white while others are black or brown.

In total, the researchers produced 24 studies with 30 estimates of discrimination for black and Latino Americans, collectively representing more than 54,000 applications submitted for more than 25,000 positions.

They concluded that, on average, “white applicants receive 36% more callbacks than equally qualified African Americans” while “[w]hite applicants receive on average 24% more callbacks than Latinos.”

Study: anti-black hiring discrimination is as prevalent today as it was in 1989

It's time you learned a hard lesson. And the more you argue the worse it's going to get for you.

Sorry, considering your dishonesty with the studies I've posted in the past, you don't have the credibility for me to look at your studies.


Besides, I know that anything I say that is not a mea culpa will just be dismissed by you.

you've never posted any "studies" that were legitimate.

Of course I did.

Are you actually denying the well known fact that there is wide spread discrimination in Ivy League admissions in FAVOR of blacks at the cost of whites?

There is no such discrimination. And still that doesn't male a case for your claim of national anti white discrimination.

Yes there is, and yes it does.

If you could produce the evidence you would have done so. So there is no such discrimination and yur constant crying amd whining doesn't make it so.

 

[jillian]

Sorry, considering your dishonesty with the studies I've posted in the past, you don't have the credibility for me to look at your studies.


Besides, I know that anything I say that is not a mea culpa will just be dismissed by you.

you've never posted any "studies" that were legitimate.

Of course I did.

Are you actually denying the well known fact that there is wide spread discrimination in Ivy League admissions in FAVOR of blacks at the cost of whites?

There is no such discrimination. And still that doesn't male a case for your claim of national anti white discrimination.

Yes there is, and yes it does.

If you could produce the evidence you would have done so. So there is no such discrimination and yur constant crying amd whining doesn't make it so.

There is no anti white bias in the ivy leagues. If there were then most ivied wouldn't look like biff and muffy's playtime. (Although now it's probably biff, muffy and mei

 

[jillian]

Sorry, considering your dishonesty with the studies I've posted in the past, you don't have the credibility for me to look at your studies.


Besides, I know that anything I say that is not a mea culpa will just be dismissed by you.

you've never posted any "studies" that were legitimate.

Of course I did.

Are you actually denying the well known fact that there is wide spread discrimination in Ivy League admissions in FAVOR of blacks at the cost of whites?

Because it's false

Have you ever been on an Ivy League campus?

No, I have not.


But the studies clearly show a 300 point discrimination in favor of students that have black skin.

Actually they show that thee are more whites than everyone else in those ivy league schools.

Yup. He's clearly never been on an Ivy League campus. When we looked at Harvard it was not particularly diverse. And even a school like NYU in the heart of NYC has mostly white and Asian kids. (With some, but not enough, diversity)

 

[Correll]

you've never posted any "studies" that were legitimate.

Of course I did.

Are you actually denying the well known fact that there is wide spread discrimination in Ivy League admissions in FAVOR of blacks at the cost of whites?

Because it's false

Have you ever been on an Ivy League campus?

I doubt if he ever has. He posted up a 1989 study and makes a claim.

SO post a later study refuting the study I posted, or admit that the numbers and the discrimination are real.

No. YOU produce evidence of a national policy of racial discrimination against whites in all the areas I detailed.

We've been talking about when I already did that, and your defense was to play stupid.

 

[IM2]

Of course I did.

Are you actually denying the well known fact that there is wide spread discrimination in Ivy League admissions in FAVOR of blacks at the cost of whites?

Because it's false

Have you ever been on an Ivy League campus?

I doubt if he ever has. He posted up a 1989 study and makes a claim.

SO post a later study refuting the study I posted, or admit that the numbers and the discrimination are real.

No. YOU produce evidence of a national policy of racial discrimination against whites in all the areas I detailed.

We've been talking about when I already did that, and your defense was to play stupid.

.You never did show that. You can't show that. It does not exist.

 

[Correll]

Sorry, considering your dishonesty with the studies I've posted in the past, you don't have the credibility for me to look at your studies.


Besides, I know that anything I say that is not a mea culpa will just be dismissed by you.

you've never posted any "studies" that were legitimate.

Of course I did.

Are you actually denying the well known fact that there is wide spread discrimination in Ivy League admissions in FAVOR of blacks at the cost of whites?

Because it's false

Have you ever been on an Ivy League campus?

No, I have not.


But the studies clearly show a 300 point discrimination in favor of students that have black skin.

Actually they show that thee are more whites than everyone else in those ivy league schools.

BUt significantly underrepresented according to this link.


Ivy League - Wikipedia

 

[Correll]

Sorry, considering your dishonesty with the studies I've posted in the past, you don't have the credibility for me to look at your studies.


Besides, I know that anything I say that is not a mea culpa will just be dismissed by you.

you've never posted any "studies" that were legitimate.

Of course I did.

Are you actually denying the well known fact that there is wide spread discrimination in Ivy League admissions in FAVOR of blacks at the cost of whites?

There is no such discrimination. And still that doesn't male a case for your claim of national anti white discrimination.

Yes there is, and yes it does.

If you could produce the evidence you would have done so. So there is no such discrimination and yur constant crying amd whining doesn't make it so.

Then why is princeton resisting revealing their admission records?


Princeton is scrambling to block its admissions records from being released

 

[Correll]

you've never posted any "studies" that were legitimate.

Of course I did.

Are you actually denying the well known fact that there is wide spread discrimination in Ivy League admissions in FAVOR of blacks at the cost of whites?

Because it's false

Have you ever been on an Ivy League campus?

No, I have not.


But the studies clearly show a 300 point discrimination in favor of students that have black skin.

Actually they show that thee are more whites than everyone else in those ivy league schools.

Yup. He's clearly never been on an Ivy League campus. When we looked at Harvard it was not particularly diverse. And even a school like NYU in the heart of NYC has mostly white and Asian kids. (With some, but not enough, diversity)

These numbers from 2011 show otherwise.



Ivy League - Wikipedia

 

[Correll]

Because it's false

Have you ever been on an Ivy League campus?

I doubt if he ever has. He posted up a 1989 study and makes a claim.

SO post a later study refuting the study I posted, or admit that the numbers and the discrimination are real.

No. YOU produce evidence of a national policy of racial discrimination against whites in all the areas I detailed.

We've been talking about when I already did that, and your defense was to play stupid.

.You never did show that. You can't show that. It does not exist.

Totally did, and you know it.


Does it not bother you that you have to lie?

 

[IM2]

you've never posted any "studies" that were legitimate.

Of course I did.

Are you actually denying the well known fact that there is wide spread discrimination in Ivy League admissions in FAVOR of blacks at the cost of whites?

There is no such discrimination. And still that doesn't male a case for your claim of national anti white discrimination.

Yes there is, and yes it does.

If you could produce the evidence you would have done so. So there is no such discrimination and yur constant crying amd whining doesn't make it so.

Then why is princeton resisting revealing their admission records?


Princeton is scrambling to block its admissions records from being released

Princeton is not a national policy of anti white discrimination in, housing, education, law enforcement, criminal justice, income and wealth, hoe ownership, jobs, promotions and health care.

 

[IM2]

Of course I did.

Are you actually denying the well known fact that there is wide spread discrimination in Ivy League admissions in FAVOR of blacks at the cost of whites?

Because it's false

Have you ever been on an Ivy League campus?

No, I have not.


But the studies clearly show a 300 point discrimination in favor of students that have black skin.

Actually they show that thee are more whites than everyone else in those ivy league schools.

Yup. He's clearly never been on an Ivy League campus. When we looked at Harvard it was not particularly diverse. And even a school like NYU in the heart of NYC has mostly white and Asian kids. (With some, but not enough, diversity)

These numbers from 2011 show otherwise.



Ivy League - Wikipedia

The majority of students in all these ivy league schools were white.

There are nearly 5,000 universities and colleges in this nation. 8 of them are in the ivy league. 8 colleges show no national policy of anything.

 

[IM2]

I doubt if he ever has. He posted up a 1989 study and makes a claim.

SO post a later study refuting the study I posted, or admit that the numbers and the discrimination are real.

No. YOU produce evidence of a national policy of racial discrimination against whites in all the areas I detailed.

We've been talking about when I already did that, and your defense was to play stupid.

.You never did show that. You can't show that. It does not exist.

Totally did, and you know it.


Does it not bother you that you have to lie?

It doesn't bother me because I'm not the one lying.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

I'm glad you posted this, because I have a couple questions for proponents of this sort of thought on which I've never been able to get a straight answer.

So, when black people are turned down automatically for a job position, I can see the benefit, in that there's less competition for any job spot. A white individual doesn't automatically benefit from this, but as often as the more qualified candidate was the nonwhite that was passed over, the white candidate benefited. Granted. Insofar as people will only hire whites, whites benefit.

That said, how did Bob's grandparents benefit from the bank being shady to black people? Now that banks are less racist, have they stopped loaning money to otherwise qualified whites? If Bob's grandparents paid their mortgage successfully, then did they benefit from black people being shit on, or did they just benefit from the bank making an accurate assessment of their ability to repay their loan?

How did Bob benefit from that black girl getting arrested? If black mustache had let that girl off with a warning, would that somehow have obligated blonde mustache to throw cuffs on Bob? If there's a law on the books somewhere that says that for every white person let off with a warning a black person must go down in their place, I haven't seen it.

I keep hearing and reading this argument that all white people benefit from the oppression of people of color, but in most of these cases, I'm not seeing it. When I've been arrested in the past, not ONE of my white friends, acquaintances or family members have ever received a boon of any sort from it, near as I can tell. Perhaps you can explain to me where I'm mistaken?