CDZ What is White Privilege?

[ChrisL]

I think this is white privilege in a nutshell.

Eddie Murphy goes undercover - Snotr

 

[2aguy]

White Privilige is simply another way to try to guilt people into ceding more control to lefty overlords....who know how to keep you from being mean....just submit to the Borg collective an all will be well......

 

[Derideo_Te]

No, the onus is on you to prove these aren't just opinions. Good Luck!

BZZZT Wrong!

I have substantiated what constitutes white privilege with well researched and documented sources.

The onus rests on you to disprove my sources. Merely calling the "opinions" is merely gainsaying and the onus remains on you to provide something more than your biased "opinion".

 

[TakeAStepBack]

No, the onus is on you to prove these aren't just opinions. Good Luck!

BZZZT Wrong!

I have substantiated what constitutes white privilege with well researched and documented sources.

The onus rests on you to disprove my sources. Merely calling the "opinions" is merely gainsaying and the onus remains on you to provide something more than your biased "opinion".

Opinions can not be proven.

 

[Derideo_Te]

No, the onus is on you to prove these aren't just opinions. Good Luck!

BZZZT Wrong!

I have substantiated what constitutes white privilege with well researched and documented sources.

The onus rests on you to disprove my sources. Merely calling the "opinions" is merely gainsaying and the onus remains on you to provide something more than your biased "opinion".

Opinions can not be proven.

Which is why the 121 References were not "opinion" but instead well sourced citations.

However we both agree that your worthless "opinion" has zero substance. Have a nice day.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

No, the onus is on you to prove these aren't just opinions. Good Luck!

BZZZT Wrong!

I have substantiated what constitutes white privilege with well researched and documented sources.

The onus rests on you to disprove my sources. Merely calling the "opinions" is merely gainsaying and the onus remains on you to provide something more than your biased "opinion".

Opinions can not be proven.

Which is why the 121 References were not "opinion" but instead well sourced citations.

However we both agree that your worthless "opinion" has zero substance. Have a nice day.

The references are based on the perspective of those who believe in the mystic "white privilege".
Lets have a look at a few of them just to be sure:

1. McIntosh, Peggy. "Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack." Beyond Heroes and Holidays. 1998. Endid Lee. Teaching for Change, 1998.

According to McIntosh and Lee, whites in a society considered culturally a part of the Western World enjoy advantages that non-whites do not experience.[1] This leads to the controversy over whether or not White people should be able to enjoy these privileges. The term denotes both obvious and less obvious passive advantages that white persons may not recognize they have, which distinguishes it from overt bias or prejudice.

That's nice. It fails to identify those who are "white" but do not enjoy these perceived passive advantages. Leading to a complete crumbling of the theory.

These include cultural affirmations of one's own worth; presumed greater social status; and freedom to move, buy, work, play, and speak freely.[1] The effects can be seen in professional, educational, and personal contexts.[3] The concept of white privilege also implies the right to assume the universality of one's own experiences, marking others as different or exceptional while perceiving oneself as normal.

The right to assume! How clever. White privilege is a concept. A construct created in the minds of those who believe that there is an invisible backpack in which white people receive for being white. It seems to me, that those who are making the assertion of a white privilege, are assuming the right to assume something and then projecting it onto an entire group of humans who are white. There is no such thing as white people in any proper context. The same as there is no black in any proper context. Individuals who have a white skin or a black skin tells absolutely nothing about their socio-economic status. Their origin or background.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

1. Cite error: The named reference Blum.2C_L._2008_p._312 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

Oooops!

 

[Derideo_Te]

No, the onus is on you to prove these aren't just opinions. Good Luck!

BZZZT Wrong!

I have substantiated what constitutes white privilege with well researched and documented sources.

The onus rests on you to disprove my sources. Merely calling the "opinions" is merely gainsaying and the onus remains on you to provide something more than your biased "opinion".

Opinions can not be proven.

Which is why the 121 References were not "opinion" but instead well sourced citations.

However we both agree that your worthless "opinion" has zero substance. Have a nice day.

The references are based on the perspective of those who believe in the mystic "white privilege".
Lets have a look at a few of them just to be sure:

1. McIntosh, Peggy. "Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack." Beyond Heroes and Holidays. 1998. Endid Lee. Teaching for Change, 1998.

According to McIntosh and Lee, whites in a society considered culturally a part of the Western World enjoy advantages that non-whites do not experience.[1] This leads to the controversy over whether or not White people should be able to enjoy these privileges. The term denotes both obvious and less obvious passive advantages that white persons may not recognize they have, which distinguishes it from overt bias or prejudice.

That's nice. It fails to identify those who are "white" but do not enjoy these perceived passive advantages. Leading to a complete crumbling of the theory.

These include cultural affirmations of one's own worth; presumed greater social status; and freedom to move, buy, work, play, and speak freely.[1] The effects can be seen in professional, educational, and personal contexts.[3] The concept of white privilege also implies the right to assume the universality of one's own experiences, marking others as different or exceptional while perceiving oneself as normal.

The right to assume! How clever. White privilege is a concept. A construct created in the minds of those who believe that there is an invisible backpack in which white people receive for being white. It seems to me, that those who are making the assertion of a white privilege, are assuming the right to assume something and then projecting it onto an entire group of humans who are white. There is no such thing as white people in any proper context. The same as there is no black in any proper context. Individuals who have a white skin or a black skin tells absolutely nothing about their socio-economic status. Their origin or background.

Thank you for exposing your reading comprehension shortcoming. Obviously you lack the requisite level of understanding to participate in a meaningful discussion on this topic. Your cherry picking of words out of context followed by a ranting screed that could have been taken word for word from Hate AM is amusing but does nothing more than reinforce that fact that what passes for your "opinion" is based, at best, upon disinformation from dubious sources.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

No, the onus is on you to prove these aren't just opinions. Good Luck!

BZZZT Wrong!

I have substantiated what constitutes white privilege with well researched and documented sources.

The onus rests on you to disprove my sources. Merely calling the "opinions" is merely gainsaying and the onus remains on you to provide something more than your biased "opinion".

Opinions can not be proven.

Which is why the 121 References were not "opinion" but instead well sourced citations.

However we both agree that your worthless "opinion" has zero substance. Have a nice day.

The references are based on the perspective of those who believe in the mystic "white privilege".
Lets have a look at a few of them just to be sure:

1. McIntosh, Peggy. "Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack." Beyond Heroes and Holidays. 1998. Endid Lee. Teaching for Change, 1998.

According to McIntosh and Lee, whites in a society considered culturally a part of the Western World enjoy advantages that non-whites do not experience.[1] This leads to the controversy over whether or not White people should be able to enjoy these privileges. The term denotes both obvious and less obvious passive advantages that white persons may not recognize they have, which distinguishes it from overt bias or prejudice.

That's nice. It fails to identify those who are "white" but do not enjoy these perceived passive advantages. Leading to a complete crumbling of the theory.

These include cultural affirmations of one's own worth; presumed greater social status; and freedom to move, buy, work, play, and speak freely.[1] The effects can be seen in professional, educational, and personal contexts.[3] The concept of white privilege also implies the right to assume the universality of one's own experiences, marking others as different or exceptional while perceiving oneself as normal.

The right to assume! How clever. White privilege is a concept. A construct created in the minds of those who believe that there is an invisible backpack in which white people receive for being white. It seems to me, that those who are making the assertion of a white privilege, are assuming the right to assume something and then projecting it onto an entire group of humans who are white. There is no such thing as white people in any proper context. The same as there is no black in any proper context. Individuals who have a white skin or a black skin tells absolutely nothing about their socio-economic status. Their origin or background.

Thank you for exposing your reading comprehension shortcoming. Obviously you lack the requisite level of understanding to participate in a meaningful discussion on this topic. Your cherry picking of words out of context followed by a ranting screed that could have been taken word for word from Hate AM is amusing but does nothing more than reinforce that fact that what passes for your "opinion" is based, at best, upon disinformation from dubious sources.

There there, fella. it's ok to cite opinions, just make sure that when you do so you recognize that is all they are. Opinions can not be verified as facts. The entire cite source from wiki, minus #35 which is an oops, is a theoretical construct developed inside the minds of those theorizing. Not one shred of real world evidence is put forth to verify any of it beyond that.

Which is why you're trying to turn this into a personal flogging instead of making a real case for real world application of the construct. Not one single piece of evidence outside of theory.

 

[Derideo_Te]

BZZZT Wrong!

I have substantiated what constitutes white privilege with well researched and documented sources.

The onus rests on you to disprove my sources. Merely calling the "opinions" is merely gainsaying and the onus remains on you to provide something more than your biased "opinion".

Opinions can not be proven.

Which is why the 121 References were not "opinion" but instead well sourced citations.

However we both agree that your worthless "opinion" has zero substance. Have a nice day.

The references are based on the perspective of those who believe in the mystic "white privilege".
Lets have a look at a few of them just to be sure:

1. McIntosh, Peggy. "Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack." Beyond Heroes and Holidays. 1998. Endid Lee. Teaching for Change, 1998.

According to McIntosh and Lee, whites in a society considered culturally a part of the Western World enjoy advantages that non-whites do not experience.[1] This leads to the controversy over whether or not White people should be able to enjoy these privileges. The term denotes both obvious and less obvious passive advantages that white persons may not recognize they have, which distinguishes it from overt bias or prejudice.

That's nice. It fails to identify those who are "white" but do not enjoy these perceived passive advantages. Leading to a complete crumbling of the theory.

These include cultural affirmations of one's own worth; presumed greater social status; and freedom to move, buy, work, play, and speak freely.[1] The effects can be seen in professional, educational, and personal contexts.[3] The concept of white privilege also implies the right to assume the universality of one's own experiences, marking others as different or exceptional while perceiving oneself as normal.

The right to assume! How clever. White privilege is a concept. A construct created in the minds of those who believe that there is an invisible backpack in which white people receive for being white. It seems to me, that those who are making the assertion of a white privilege, are assuming the right to assume something and then projecting it onto an entire group of humans who are white. There is no such thing as white people in any proper context. The same as there is no black in any proper context. Individuals who have a white skin or a black skin tells absolutely nothing about their socio-economic status. Their origin or background.

Thank you for exposing your reading comprehension shortcoming. Obviously you lack the requisite level of understanding to participate in a meaningful discussion on this topic. Your cherry picking of words out of context followed by a ranting screed that could have been taken word for word from Hate AM is amusing but does nothing more than reinforce that fact that what passes for your "opinion" is based, at best, upon disinformation from dubious sources.

There there, fella. it's ok to cite opinions, just make sure that when you do so you recognize that is all they are. Opinions can not be verified as facts. The entire cite source from wiki, minus #35 which is an oops, is a theoretical construct developed inside the minds of those theorizing. Not one shred of real world evidence is put forth to verify any of it beyond that.

Which is why you're trying to turn this into a personal flogging instead of making a real case for real world application of the construct. Not one single piece of evidence outside of theory.

You are the one drowning in denial and yes, the onus remains on you to provide credible sources refuting the sources that I have provided. Your silly semantic games don't count. Next time try something factual and reputable.

 

[Ava]

What is White Privilege?

No snarky one liner comments. No adhominems. I want nothing other than an legit argument on this topic so I can understand the minds of those who subscribe to this idea. For those of you who don't know what an argument is, or is not, see below.

What is white privilege? A made-up meme by Dems to give freeloaders another excuse to think they are really victims of someone, something else other than themselves, who created their own feelings of uselessness and unworthiness.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Opinions can not be proven.

Which is why the 121 References were not "opinion" but instead well sourced citations.

However we both agree that your worthless "opinion" has zero substance. Have a nice day.

The references are based on the perspective of those who believe in the mystic "white privilege".
Lets have a look at a few of them just to be sure:

1. McIntosh, Peggy. "Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack." Beyond Heroes and Holidays. 1998. Endid Lee. Teaching for Change, 1998.

According to McIntosh and Lee, whites in a society considered culturally a part of the Western World enjoy advantages that non-whites do not experience.[1] This leads to the controversy over whether or not White people should be able to enjoy these privileges. The term denotes both obvious and less obvious passive advantages that white persons may not recognize they have, which distinguishes it from overt bias or prejudice.

That's nice. It fails to identify those who are "white" but do not enjoy these perceived passive advantages. Leading to a complete crumbling of the theory.

These include cultural affirmations of one's own worth; presumed greater social status; and freedom to move, buy, work, play, and speak freely.[1] The effects can be seen in professional, educational, and personal contexts.[3] The concept of white privilege also implies the right to assume the universality of one's own experiences, marking others as different or exceptional while perceiving oneself as normal.

The right to assume! How clever. White privilege is a concept. A construct created in the minds of those who believe that there is an invisible backpack in which white people receive for being white. It seems to me, that those who are making the assertion of a white privilege, are assuming the right to assume something and then projecting it onto an entire group of humans who are white. There is no such thing as white people in any proper context. The same as there is no black in any proper context. Individuals who have a white skin or a black skin tells absolutely nothing about their socio-economic status. Their origin or background.

Thank you for exposing your reading comprehension shortcoming. Obviously you lack the requisite level of understanding to participate in a meaningful discussion on this topic. Your cherry picking of words out of context followed by a ranting screed that could have been taken word for word from Hate AM is amusing but does nothing more than reinforce that fact that what passes for your "opinion" is based, at best, upon disinformation from dubious sources.

There there, fella. it's ok to cite opinions, just make sure that when you do so you recognize that is all they are. Opinions can not be verified as facts. The entire cite source from wiki, minus #35 which is an oops, is a theoretical construct developed inside the minds of those theorizing. Not one shred of real world evidence is put forth to verify any of it beyond that.

Which is why you're trying to turn this into a personal flogging instead of making a real case for real world application of the construct. Not one single piece of evidence outside of theory.

You are the one drowning in denial and yes, the onus remains on you to provide credible sources refuting the sources that I have provided. Your silly semantic games don't count. Next time try something factual and reputable.

I don't have to prove anything. Your own cite sourcing is explicit. White privilege is a concept. A theory, a construct within those theorizing.

Not one real world application or evidence is referenced. That is what makes it an opinion and not a fact.

Better luck next time.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Which is why the 121 References were not "opinion" but instead well sourced citations.

However we both agree that your worthless "opinion" has zero substance. Have a nice day.

The references are based on the perspective of those who believe in the mystic "white privilege".
Lets have a look at a few of them just to be sure:

1. McIntosh, Peggy. "Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack." Beyond Heroes and Holidays. 1998. Endid Lee. Teaching for Change, 1998.

According to McIntosh and Lee, whites in a society considered culturally a part of the Western World enjoy advantages that non-whites do not experience.[1] This leads to the controversy over whether or not White people should be able to enjoy these privileges. The term denotes both obvious and less obvious passive advantages that white persons may not recognize they have, which distinguishes it from overt bias or prejudice.

That's nice. It fails to identify those who are "white" but do not enjoy these perceived passive advantages. Leading to a complete crumbling of the theory.

These include cultural affirmations of one's own worth; presumed greater social status; and freedom to move, buy, work, play, and speak freely.[1] The effects can be seen in professional, educational, and personal contexts.[3] The concept of white privilege also implies the right to assume the universality of one's own experiences, marking others as different or exceptional while perceiving oneself as normal.

The right to assume! How clever. White privilege is a concept. A construct created in the minds of those who believe that there is an invisible backpack in which white people receive for being white. It seems to me, that those who are making the assertion of a white privilege, are assuming the right to assume something and then projecting it onto an entire group of humans who are white. There is no such thing as white people in any proper context. The same as there is no black in any proper context. Individuals who have a white skin or a black skin tells absolutely nothing about their socio-economic status. Their origin or background.

Thank you for exposing your reading comprehension shortcoming. Obviously you lack the requisite level of understanding to participate in a meaningful discussion on this topic. Your cherry picking of words out of context followed by a ranting screed that could have been taken word for word from Hate AM is amusing but does nothing more than reinforce that fact that what passes for your "opinion" is based, at best, upon disinformation from dubious sources.

There there, fella. it's ok to cite opinions, just make sure that when you do so you recognize that is all they are. Opinions can not be verified as facts. The entire cite source from wiki, minus #35 which is an oops, is a theoretical construct developed inside the minds of those theorizing. Not one shred of real world evidence is put forth to verify any of it beyond that.

Which is why you're trying to turn this into a personal flogging instead of making a real case for real world application of the construct. Not one single piece of evidence outside of theory.

You are the one drowning in denial and yes, the onus remains on you to provide credible sources refuting the sources that I have provided. Your silly semantic games don't count. Next time try something factual and reputable.

I don't have to prove anything. Your own cite sourcing is explicit. White privilege is a concept. A theory, a construct within those theorizing.

Not one real world application or evidence is referenced. That is what makes it an opinion and not a fact.

Better luck next time.

Thank you for tacitly admitting that you cannot substantiate your worthless "opinion". Have a nice day.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

The references are based on the perspective of those who believe in the mystic "white privilege".
Lets have a look at a few of them just to be sure:

1. McIntosh, Peggy. "Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack." Beyond Heroes and Holidays. 1998. Endid Lee. Teaching for Change, 1998.

According to McIntosh and Lee, whites in a society considered culturally a part of the Western World enjoy advantages that non-whites do not experience.[1] This leads to the controversy over whether or not White people should be able to enjoy these privileges. The term denotes both obvious and less obvious passive advantages that white persons may not recognize they have, which distinguishes it from overt bias or prejudice.

That's nice. It fails to identify those who are "white" but do not enjoy these perceived passive advantages. Leading to a complete crumbling of the theory.

These include cultural affirmations of one's own worth; presumed greater social status; and freedom to move, buy, work, play, and speak freely.[1] The effects can be seen in professional, educational, and personal contexts.[3] The concept of white privilege also implies the right to assume the universality of one's own experiences, marking others as different or exceptional while perceiving oneself as normal.

The right to assume! How clever. White privilege is a concept. A construct created in the minds of those who believe that there is an invisible backpack in which white people receive for being white. It seems to me, that those who are making the assertion of a white privilege, are assuming the right to assume something and then projecting it onto an entire group of humans who are white. There is no such thing as white people in any proper context. The same as there is no black in any proper context. Individuals who have a white skin or a black skin tells absolutely nothing about their socio-economic status. Their origin or background.

Thank you for exposing your reading comprehension shortcoming. Obviously you lack the requisite level of understanding to participate in a meaningful discussion on this topic. Your cherry picking of words out of context followed by a ranting screed that could have been taken word for word from Hate AM is amusing but does nothing more than reinforce that fact that what passes for your "opinion" is based, at best, upon disinformation from dubious sources.

There there, fella. it's ok to cite opinions, just make sure that when you do so you recognize that is all they are. Opinions can not be verified as facts. The entire cite source from wiki, minus #35 which is an oops, is a theoretical construct developed inside the minds of those theorizing. Not one shred of real world evidence is put forth to verify any of it beyond that.

Which is why you're trying to turn this into a personal flogging instead of making a real case for real world application of the construct. Not one single piece of evidence outside of theory.

You are the one drowning in denial and yes, the onus remains on you to provide credible sources refuting the sources that I have provided. Your silly semantic games don't count. Next time try something factual and reputable.

I don't have to prove anything. Your own cite sourcing is explicit. White privilege is a concept. A theory, a construct within those theorizing.

Not one real world application or evidence is referenced. That is what makes it an opinion and not a fact.

Better luck next time.

Thank you for tacitly admitting that you cannot substantiate your worthless "opinion". Have a nice day.

No problem. White privilege is a worthless opinion too.

 

[jasonnfree]

Thank you for exposing your reading comprehension shortcoming. Obviously you lack the requisite level of understanding to participate in a meaningful discussion on this topic. Your cherry picking of words out of context followed by a ranting screed that could have been taken word for word from Hate AM is amusing but does nothing more than reinforce that fact that what passes for your "opinion" is based, at best, upon disinformation from dubious sources.

There there, fella. it's ok to cite opinions, just make sure that when you do so you recognize that is all they are. Opinions can not be verified as facts. The entire cite source from wiki, minus #35 which is an oops, is a theoretical construct developed inside the minds of those theorizing. Not one shred of real world evidence is put forth to verify any of it beyond that.

Which is why you're trying to turn this into a personal flogging instead of making a real case for real world application of the construct. Not one single piece of evidence outside of theory.

You are the one drowning in denial and yes, the onus remains on you to provide credible sources refuting the sources that I have provided. Your silly semantic games don't count. Next time try something factual and reputable.

I don't have to prove anything. Your own cite sourcing is explicit. White privilege is a concept. A theory, a construct within those theorizing.

Not one real world application or evidence is referenced. That is what makes it an opinion and not a fact.

Better luck next time.

Thank you for tacitly admitting that you cannot substantiate your worthless "opinion". Have a nice day.

No problem. White privilege is a worthless opinion too.

All opinions have some worth. White privilege is a form of racism, and I see racism alive and well on this forum.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

There there, fella. it's ok to cite opinions, just make sure that when you do so you recognize that is all they are. Opinions can not be verified as facts. The entire cite source from wiki, minus #35 which is an oops, is a theoretical construct developed inside the minds of those theorizing. Not one shred of real world evidence is put forth to verify any of it beyond that.

Which is why you're trying to turn this into a personal flogging instead of making a real case for real world application of the construct. Not one single piece of evidence outside of theory.

You are the one drowning in denial and yes, the onus remains on you to provide credible sources refuting the sources that I have provided. Your silly semantic games don't count. Next time try something factual and reputable.

I don't have to prove anything. Your own cite sourcing is explicit. White privilege is a concept. A theory, a construct within those theorizing.

Not one real world application or evidence is referenced. That is what makes it an opinion and not a fact.

Better luck next time.

Thank you for tacitly admitting that you cannot substantiate your worthless "opinion". Have a nice day.

No problem. White privilege is a worthless opinion too.

All opinions have some worth. White privilege is a form of racism, and I see racism alive and well on this forum.

So white privilege is racism now?

 

[Asclepias]

You are the one drowning in denial and yes, the onus remains on you to provide credible sources refuting the sources that I have provided. Your silly semantic games don't count. Next time try something factual and reputable.

I don't have to prove anything. Your own cite sourcing is explicit. White privilege is a concept. A theory, a construct within those theorizing.

Not one real world application or evidence is referenced. That is what makes it an opinion and not a fact.

Better luck next time.

Thank you for tacitly admitting that you cannot substantiate your worthless "opinion". Have a nice day.

No problem. White privilege is a worthless opinion too.

All opinions have some worth. White privilege is a form of racism, and I see racism alive and well on this forum.

So white privilege is racism now?

Bingo.

 

[pillars]

Not necessarily. White privilege is mostly unconscious for a lot of whites.

 

[Asclepias]

Not necessarily. White privilege is mostly unconscious for a lot of whites.

That doesnt make it any less a form of racism. In the case of it being unconscious then its institutionalized racism

 

[ChrisL]