Angelus Errare
Banned
Tell me about it
White Fragility Leads to White Violence: Why Conversations w/ White Ppl Fall Apart
- Thread starter Lime
- Start date
- Status
Tell me about it
MikeBreezy92
Member
Nah he stating that as a end goal not as a current solution.
Sunster
Member
But we don't because racism exists and minorities are sick of it. They have voices now so that means white people will occasionally catch some mild heat over the centuries upon centuries of oppression. "White people don't season their food" jokes are not a real issue. Saying, "White people are racist" is not a real issue either. It hurts no one. The society we live in where racism is still alive and well and people are dying because of it is the real issue. Focus on that.
How much longer should non-white people wait to be seen as individuals by white people? Just give a number. Ballpark it.
Skellig Gra
Member
This is just a circular argument though. Any demographic will most likely see a different demographic as a singular group to some extent. It's not anything "white people" have a monopoly on. It's the issue of the power that white people have as the majority in Western society.
excelsiorlef
Member
How can you speak to anyone else's socioeconomic status?
Captin Quacker
Member
I did and at end of the day white people are still the default, there always the first thought of, first in line in damn near everything and them getting offended over small bit generalization is hilarious
It's not circular if you're acknowledging that one group has the clear advantage over all the others.
Skellig Gra
Member
I'm saying demographic generalizations always happen regardless getting to the other posters point about how we should view everyone as individuals, it will never happen regardless of who has the most power.
Most people acknowledge that. People still don't like assumptions made of them due to this advantage, though.
Which speaks to the point of the thread. Minorities get told to deal with it, white people demand to be handled with care. One side has to give and it's not the disadvantaged side.
Yes by racist assholes who do not somehow constitute worldwide "white people". I both hate being part of a generalization(white people are this or that) and I'm also sure as hell not telling others to just "deal" with generalizations(black people or other ethnic groups as a whole are this or that"). I don't see why it has to be an either or.
NobleXenon
Member
Even though I agree with that idealism; that was never going to happen. In my experience, the only way for someone to be empathetic or woke is to have similar experiences to the injustices that go on. I know plenty of white women who voted for Trump even though they know how bad sexism is in their lives; they just didn't want to lose what little privilege they had left - being white. Now that Trump will finish off what's left of the "White Working Class" by making whites poorer, look dumber, and more useless, maybe they'll be woke in four years, who knows.
I used to think it was trying to have super long conversations or debates, but that proved largely useless, especially during the election campaign. It's white people's self-destructive voting patterns, drug abuse, and resting on their laurels that are starting to make them equal with other minorities. I don't know if this will lead to the possibility of getting past systemic and institutional racism, sexism, etc by having everyone being able to relate to each other since they'll all be low class and unprivileged.
It sucks to type that, but it is what it is.
NoblesseOblige
Banned
Don't be part of a generalization then. Pretty darn simple.
Snowman Prophet of Doom
Member
I would suspect that the people asking not to be generalized are probably only partially overlapping with the people who do so freely of other minority groups.
Having said that, the only time I chafe is when my opinion, itself, is essentialized as being a product of my race and gender, as though privilege is the be-all end-all of invalidating disagreement a white dude may have with the general views of those advocating for social justice.
You can't generalize a whole race and then expect people to go "Ah no they dont mean me, I'm one of the good ones". At least that is not an understanding I am willing to accept personally. (and neither should anyone else, whatever race/religion/sexuality).
dave is ok
aztek is ok
This is not actual advice. It makes no sense.
NoblesseOblige
Banned
I disagree. "Most people" take offense to the mere implication that they've had advantages others have not. They take it personally, instead of looking at it from a societal level. The only reason they don't like it is because they are misconstruing the entire point of recognizing that it exists, thereby pushing back against the concept, and allowing it to continue.
O-kay? Bizarre response.
If you say "white people are cancer" you don't get to say "oh I only mean those ones, not you" any more than you can say "black people are lazy" and expect it to be understood that you're not talking about everyone.
I absolutely take issue with the expectation that because you're fighting for social justice, you're forgiven for using stereotyping, lazy tropes, and acting like an asshole. It's not even an argument about what actually has more impact; it's just showing you're a hypocrite.
Ciccariello-Maher said:
And this is bullshit and trivialization of actual violence. No, someone getting defensive is not the same as lynchings, beatings, police violence.
Ordinaryundone
Member
Someday I think you'll realize this rhetoric cuts both ways.
Sunster
Member
Not really, you are kinda living up to that term.
Being generalized in the abstract is a lot different than being marginalized in reality. I don't doubt that your feelings can be just as delicate as everyone else, and I don't doubt that as an individual you've got problems unique to you, I just care less because the bigger perspective tells us that white people in general need less care and attention, not equal. It's unrealistic to expect a fair fight on uneven ground. You can't approach an animal backed into a corner and get mad when they growl. You gotta take some hits before everybody reaches parity.
I see a lot of hand wringing from people who seem to see the bigger picture, and who seem to want to be allies to the disadvantaged, but for some strange reason are one relatively small slight away from, at best, sidelining themselves, or at worst, joining the enemy. Honestly, if you're really that soft, what use are you to them anyway? They need bodies that can take a hit because as a group they don't have the luxury of taking the path of least resistance.
John Kowalski
Banned
Talk about prophetic thread titles
Unless it is cross burning or straight lynching, things they can just wave off as isolated incidents or "the south is terrible", people don't want to hear it. Reflecting on how this country has built bigotry into it's DNA from top to bottom is so heavy stuff, but something everyone needs to be aware of.
Setting aside racism, a good chunk of this country is trying to write into law what bathroom people can use, what women can do with their bodies, and what rights you can have depending on who you marry.
If a trans person telling you about the issues they face, makes you get defensive
If a woman talking about the issues they face, makes you get defensive
etc, then you right want to do a little introspection.
Setting aside racism, a good chunk of this country is trying to write into law what bathroom people can use, what women can do with their bodies, and what rights you can have depending on who you marry.
If a trans person telling you about the issues they face, makes you get defensive
If a woman talking about the issues they face, makes you get defensive
etc, then you right want to do a little introspection.
lmao, pretty much.
Gotdatmoney
Member
If we are having a legitimate discussion about race and someone really needs to jump in and go "yeah but not all white people", that person aint even worth the effort. Come the fuck on.
America is still a country literally built from racism amd still drenched in it. You can't seriously come out and tell me that you can't make a general comment about the beneficiaries of all this without positioning that "some white people are good". No shit, the vast vast majority of them are good people, that doesn't need a qualifier. That qualifier doesnt change that even given that fact your country is still imcredibly racist.
It's literally a "not me doe, not poor old me". Thee most obnoxious way to center a discussion around you and being innocent.
Considered this, and other examples like this as sort of a litmus test. You can't care to understand the motivations behind this if all you see is "trolling" as the purest factor at play.
Does it bother you enough to not participate? As in does it give you enough pause to render your own movement and understanding inactive or inert?
People have been falling over themselves to fit the mold.
Also might need to re-establish the threads "common language" (definitions and terms) so that it doesn't fall apart at the seams as people attempt to drag the conversation downward.
I mention that as the topic is about acceptable language as much as anything else. And acceptable language is comfortable for the status quo language. Restricted language.
Terms that do not offend or question motives and positions, kind of language.
I think it's also important to stress the potential of self-harm that people are willing to do to themselves to re-affirm their power position in society, at least in terms of racial (and gendered) identity. It is crazy that people can act so irrational and even do harm to themselves and others, as in the case of Trump, Brexit, AfD, Front National, Gert Wilders, etc., just because they feel so threatened by requests by oppressed groups to be treated fairly and on the same level as them.
It's almost as if simple engagement with another person about a sensitive issue bothers them so much that they're willing to hurt or punish you if you keep bringing it up (aka make oppression explicit).
It's almost as if simple engagement with another person about a sensitive issue bothers them so much that they're willing to hurt or punish you if you keep bringing it up (aka make oppression explicit).
Messofanego
Banned
It's almost as if people saying "not all white people" want to have a conversation that they can actually tackle which is about semantics to divert from the actual discussion for which they're not equipped for.
Voysa Reezun
Banned
I don't know, as a dude, I learned to get over it when people make the argument that "Men" do something. I know they're not talking about me personally. I realized one day that I was being a dipshit and obfuscating the issue by fixating on the fact that whoever was making the argument didn't preface things with "Not all men, but some men..."
Can't see why it wouldn't be the same for other aspects of identity. Then again, I know some people who act like being called "cis" is a slur against them, so whatever. No one really wants to talk about anything, so all that is just a smokescreen.
Can't see why it wouldn't be the same for other aspects of identity. Then again, I know some people who act like being called "cis" is a slur against them, so whatever. No one really wants to talk about anything, so all that is just a smokescreen.
excelsiorlef
Member
We need a internet rule. Any thread about white fragility proves the existence of white fragility.
Call it the Robin DiAngelo rue since she reportedly coined it.
Call it the Robin DiAngelo rue since she reportedly coined it.
LegendofJoe
Member
I've been debating off and on all day with two people on Facebook that I know through a good friend that is calling out Trump for his BS constantly. They are both convinced that the Democratic party is responsible for keeping the black community down. Nothing I argue or link them to will convince them. They always fall back on democrats using welfare to keep black people impoverished. This is despite programs like Pell Grants, the Equal Opportunity Commission, affirmative action, etc. that are proven to work and supported by Democrats. They're so blinded by political tribalism they don't see that they are inherently calling black people stupid for supporting democrats. That their own black democratic leaders are conspiring to keep them down.
I usually don't bother because it's almost impossible to break though the political programming, but every once in a while I'll try anyway. I grew up surrounded by the black community and I'm proud of that. The backlash against Obama has had me on the verge of tears several times thinking about what's to come with the Trump administration. These fragile, selfish, egotistical know it all know nothings make me ashamed to be white. Heaven forbid that they have to compete on a more equal playing field with black people.
I usually don't bother because it's almost impossible to break though the political programming, but every once in a while I'll try anyway. I grew up surrounded by the black community and I'm proud of that. The backlash against Obama has had me on the verge of tears several times thinking about what's to come with the Trump administration. These fragile, selfish, egotistical know it all know nothings make me ashamed to be white. Heaven forbid that they have to compete on a more equal playing field with black people.
Poor GRIMES
Banned
No, but absolutely do not act like your opinion has more weight or is inherently more valid than someone that is actually a PoC advocating for social justice.
Snowman Prophet of Doom
Member
The reason I hold the opinions I do is because I think them more correct than the other ones I could potentially hold, so it's unclear how I could do that.
We can step outside ourselves and recognize the difference between a personal truth and an objective truth.
You don't have access to the same experiences as people facing everyday racism and living in White supremacy. You aren't exposed, at least explicitly, to what it means to be oppressed by your visible identity. So in that sense, you simply do not have the same epistemological access as others do. Therefore, there is more reason to listen to marginalized people and groups about issues of social justice and the types of marginalization they experience.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
This is from my own personal experience having these conversations, both as the white person in question, and as the white guy looking at this other white person like "dude, no, wait."
Discussions about race relations with some white people break down because sometimes, a white person is already holding a self-congratulatory position for having decided to engage at all. And they will be waiting for either outright, or more subtle, acknowledgement of that generosity.
If you do not reward that white person for allowing themselves to be placed in a vulnerable position when they didn't have to, they will close down and begin retaliating and pointing out the lack of tolerance being shown them and their suggestions.
A lot of white people really just want to be reassured while they're messing up that even with these demerits on their record, they're still one of the good ones. Because they know they're one of the good ones, down deep, and if you can't be trusted to recognize that, how the hell can you be trusted to exchange ideas in good faith?
So before you can challenge their beliefs and their worldview, you have to make sure that somewhere in the initial discussion period, you give them propers for even coming to the table. Once you do that, you're free to continue and even criticize, now that they are safe in their knowledge they're one of the good ones.
They will shut down if told they're one of the bad ones. But if you're telling them they're a good one, but here's how you become a better one, then they're all good.
Again: I've been this dude before. I've seen this guy since. I've talked to this guy, and as annoying as it may be, most of the time any progress made is made because I made sure to reassure the guy that he had not stepped outside of his bubble in vain, and that I understood him and where he was coming from.
It's some handholdy shit, for sure. Which makes usage of terms like "snowflake" and "participation trophy" that much harder to let go when they inevitably pop out.
Discussions about race relations with some white people break down because sometimes, a white person is already holding a self-congratulatory position for having decided to engage at all. And they will be waiting for either outright, or more subtle, acknowledgement of that generosity.
If you do not reward that white person for allowing themselves to be placed in a vulnerable position when they didn't have to, they will close down and begin retaliating and pointing out the lack of tolerance being shown them and their suggestions.
A lot of white people really just want to be reassured while they're messing up that even with these demerits on their record, they're still one of the good ones. Because they know they're one of the good ones, down deep, and if you can't be trusted to recognize that, how the hell can you be trusted to exchange ideas in good faith?
So before you can challenge their beliefs and their worldview, you have to make sure that somewhere in the initial discussion period, you give them propers for even coming to the table. Once you do that, you're free to continue and even criticize, now that they are safe in their knowledge they're one of the good ones.
They will shut down if told they're one of the bad ones. But if you're telling them they're a good one, but here's how you become a better one, then they're all good.
Again: I've been this dude before. I've seen this guy since. I've talked to this guy, and as annoying as it may be, most of the time any progress made is made because I made sure to reassure the guy that he had not stepped outside of his bubble in vain, and that I understood him and where he was coming from.
It's some handholdy shit, for sure. Which makes usage of terms like "snowflake" and "participation trophy" that much harder to let go when they inevitably pop out.
Gotdatmoney
Member
MistakenMobius
Member
Looking at this debate from the other side of the ocean, I can only think that Yankee are just being lazy cultural imperialist copy pasting their view on the world.
Did u ever saw a discussion about Rwanda with a Hutu teenager that was born in Belgium and is called a monster because of his ethnicity ?
Does that he refutation by the fact that he didn't participate to the genocide because he wasn't born and his parents already left for Europe, Is that Hutu fragility?
Did u ever saw any discussion telling your friendly neighborhood Muslim that he should really do something to show that he is not a supporter of ISIS?
Does that qualify as Muslim fragility?
Did u ever saw a discussion about Rwanda with a Hutu teenager that was born in Belgium and is called a monster because of his ethnicity ?
Does that he refutation by the fact that he didn't participate to the genocide because he wasn't born and his parents already left for Europe, Is that Hutu fragility?
Did u ever saw any discussion telling your friendly neighborhood Muslim that he should really do something to show that he is not a supporter of ISIS?
Does that qualify as Muslim fragility?
Bolivar687
Banned
The majority of white people indeed still have problematic misconceptions about race and this is becoming more of a problem post-election as intolerance and skepticism become normalized. I still encourage people to continue engaging in discussion as, in my experience, most people will surprise you and rise to the occasion if you have something constructive to say.
You don't understand our history. So no, no, no and no.
For centuries minorities have been bottom feeders in America or assimilated into white people(Irish, Italians) and yet I'm supposed to act like I just have to wait my turn to be equal to Chad over there? Nope. And hell, Natives may get it the WORST in this country and that's freaking absurd. Folks need to do some self-reflection
Lol, yep
I fail to see how any of that relates to the systemic history of oppression that is in America.
Do I think white people are awful people because of slavery?
No.
Do I think minorities suffer in this country because of the social constructs that came from the belief that it was okay to own people, the abolition, the resulting segregation and everything that has come since?
Yep.
Do white people benefit?
Yep.
I met John B. Smith this past weekend, part of an activist group called the Invaders during the civil rights era (pretty good documentary). He said to the crowd that when you land in an airport in Africa or Germany, they have manifestos saying they know what happened before, but they are a different people now. They acknowledge past wrongs and try to make amends and move forward.
America doesn't do that. Not with slavery, not with segregation, not with any type of systemic oppression that exists. When minorities bring it up, we're told to shut up, to do things in a certain way, to be patient, wait for our turn, etc. We have to tread around our oppressors and teach them because it makes them flip the fuck out when we mention that all of this shit that has happened in America still impacts minorities today and white people still benefit.
MistakenMobius
Member
Would u accept to be held responsible of the vietnam war or any other shitty things that the us foreign policy did through modern history?
u are technically benefiting of the America supremacy.
Gotdatmoney
Member
Obviously yes even though that has zero to with the point he was making. Countries that benefited from destructive foreign policy and acts have a responsibility to try and make amends for their action and avoid exploiting those that they have harmed.
Is this you just trying to pretend you don't ever have to take responsibility for anything? And it's not god damn fragility when you aren't benefiting from those actions to this day and denying it when it's spoken of. Explain to me where Muslims have gained huge advantage in society through ISIS (in western culture it is flat out the opposite), what does being Hutu in Belgium have to do with being the beneficiary of social structures?
Do you know what you're talking about or?
I mean, yeah.
I don't get what that has to do with anything, though. Are you just trying to absolve everybody of responsibility?
- Status