|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On May 14 2015 04:19 ZasZ. wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2015 03:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 13 2015 19:10 kwizach wrote:On May 13 2015 13:31 Wegandi wrote:On May 13 2015 13:26 Yoav wrote:On May 13 2015 13:16 Wegandi wrote:
Check your privilege is incredibly racist towards all those poor white people that have none of this 'privilege' you speak of. Properly described, it encompasses all forms of privilege. Your idea that it is intrinsically racist is a disservice to the notion. Do tell what are these privileges poor Appalachian whites have that are exclusive to white folk? You know who needs some real help in this country? Native Americans. Now, there is some goddamn racism. Here you go. "White privilege" isn't an absolute but a relative notion. The point is that all other things being equal, being white is overall an advantage in our societies compared to not being white. "Privilege" is a just term lazy social justice warriors use because they don't know how to do real research and analysis. Come on man, you know better than that. I know that, as a white straight male, my path through life is easier than it would be if I were not white, not straight, and not male. That's all privilege is. You just don't want to hear the actual message because you don't like the people spouting it.
Come to Canada. Wherever I've gone, minorities have been treated equal or better than their white counterparts, lol. It's ranged from the one black guy at my high school being well known and liked by everyone, to me being at a university where whites were just barely the majority, and nobody (except the professors for some reason) gave two shits about race.
It's probably different in places like Toronto/Vancouver, but the rest of Canada is quite nice from my experiences.
|
On May 14 2015 04:53 ZasZ. wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2015 04:44 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 14 2015 04:19 ZasZ. wrote:On May 14 2015 03:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 13 2015 19:10 kwizach wrote:On May 13 2015 13:31 Wegandi wrote:On May 13 2015 13:26 Yoav wrote:On May 13 2015 13:16 Wegandi wrote:
Check your privilege is incredibly racist towards all those poor white people that have none of this 'privilege' you speak of. Properly described, it encompasses all forms of privilege. Your idea that it is intrinsically racist is a disservice to the notion. Do tell what are these privileges poor Appalachian whites have that are exclusive to white folk? You know who needs some real help in this country? Native Americans. Now, there is some goddamn racism. Here you go. "White privilege" isn't an absolute but a relative notion. The point is that all other things being equal, being white is overall an advantage in our societies compared to not being white. "Privilege" is a just term lazy social justice warriors use because they don't know how to do real research and analysis. Come on man, you know better than that. I know that, as a white straight male, my path through life is easier than it would be if I were not white, not straight, and not male. That's all privilege is. You just don't want to hear the actual message because you don't like the people spouting it. Come on man, you should know better than that. Try school. It's both popular and fun. You don't know anything about me. But if you honestly believe that being a straight white male isn't the easiest combination of those three attributes in our day and age, I can see why people struggle to communicate with you in this thread.
Being female is arguably more of a privilege than being male. But as I said, 'privilege' is a nebulous term SJWs use to communicate general feelings about a topic. It shouldn't be used in a serious discussion, though, since it relies heavily on anecdotes, suppositions, assumptions and cherry picked data.
If you want to be taken seriously, stick to making strong arguments based on data and be prepared to defend that data to criticism, because criticism is good. It makes good ideas and arguments stronger, not weaker, and only bad ideas need fear criticism.
|
On May 14 2015 04:59 killa_robot wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2015 04:19 ZasZ. wrote:On May 14 2015 03:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 13 2015 19:10 kwizach wrote:On May 13 2015 13:31 Wegandi wrote:On May 13 2015 13:26 Yoav wrote:On May 13 2015 13:16 Wegandi wrote:
Check your privilege is incredibly racist towards all those poor white people that have none of this 'privilege' you speak of. Properly described, it encompasses all forms of privilege. Your idea that it is intrinsically racist is a disservice to the notion. Do tell what are these privileges poor Appalachian whites have that are exclusive to white folk? You know who needs some real help in this country? Native Americans. Now, there is some goddamn racism. Here you go. "White privilege" isn't an absolute but a relative notion. The point is that all other things being equal, being white is overall an advantage in our societies compared to not being white. "Privilege" is a just term lazy social justice warriors use because they don't know how to do real research and analysis. Come on man, you know better than that. I know that, as a white straight male, my path through life is easier than it would be if I were not white, not straight, and not male. That's all privilege is. You just don't want to hear the actual message because you don't like the people spouting it. Come to Canada. Wherever I've gone, minorities have been treated equal or better than their white counterparts, lol. It's ranged from the one black guy at my high school being well known and liked by everyone, to me being at a university where whites were just barely the majority, and nobody (except the professors for some reason) gave two shits about race. It's probably different in places like Toronto/Vancouver, but the rest of Canada is quite nice from my experiences.
That's the thing, I don't have any personal reason to care about racism or sexism except that I think it's bad and shouldn't happen. Overt, individual prejudice is not really a thing in most parts of the U.S. anymore because people rightfully get called out for it. It's easy to condemn one man using racial slurs while it is a lot harder to condemn a company for poor hiring practices. Similarly, when you look at it from an institutional level individuals get boiled down to their stereotypes.
The resume experiment that has been done time and time again is the perfect example. Submit two good, identical resumes to employers, but put "Jack Johnson" at the top of one and "DeSean Johnson" at the top of the other and there is a noticeable difference in responses. I'm sure most of the people who selected Jack over DeSean on no basis other than name don't consider themselves to be racist, and probably even have some black friends. That doesn't keep them from unconsciously promoting institutional racism.
I struggle with it too. It's hard for me to admit, but I am more comfortable being approached at night by a white stranger on the street than a black stranger. That's racist, and I try to fight it every time. I have no reason to feel that way except that society has conditioned me to feel that way.
|
On May 14 2015 05:04 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2015 04:53 ZasZ. wrote:On May 14 2015 04:44 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 14 2015 04:19 ZasZ. wrote:On May 14 2015 03:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 13 2015 19:10 kwizach wrote:On May 13 2015 13:31 Wegandi wrote:On May 13 2015 13:26 Yoav wrote:On May 13 2015 13:16 Wegandi wrote:
Check your privilege is incredibly racist towards all those poor white people that have none of this 'privilege' you speak of. Properly described, it encompasses all forms of privilege. Your idea that it is intrinsically racist is a disservice to the notion. Do tell what are these privileges poor Appalachian whites have that are exclusive to white folk? You know who needs some real help in this country? Native Americans. Now, there is some goddamn racism. Here you go. "White privilege" isn't an absolute but a relative notion. The point is that all other things being equal, being white is overall an advantage in our societies compared to not being white. "Privilege" is a just term lazy social justice warriors use because they don't know how to do real research and analysis. Come on man, you know better than that. I know that, as a white straight male, my path through life is easier than it would be if I were not white, not straight, and not male. That's all privilege is. You just don't want to hear the actual message because you don't like the people spouting it. Come on man, you should know better than that. Try school. It's both popular and fun. You don't know anything about me. But if you honestly believe that being a straight white male isn't the easiest combination of those three attributes in our day and age, I can see why people struggle to communicate with you in this thread. Being female is arguably more of a privilege than being male. But as I said, 'privilege' is a nebulous term SJWs use to communicate general feelings about a topic. It shouldn't be used in a serious discussion, though, since it relies heavily on anecdotes, suppositions, assumptions and cherry picked data. If you want to be taken seriously, stick to making strong arguments based on data and be prepared to defend that data to criticism, because criticism is good. It makes good ideas and arguments stronger, not weaker, and only bad ideas need fear criticism.
Ok, then care to tell me how being female is arguably more of a privilege than being male? I'm drawing blanks except for the fact that men are frequently poorly treated in divorce/custody proceedings. But that hardly makes up for the wage gap, slut shaming, etc. and occurs on a much smaller scale.
|
On May 14 2015 04:59 killa_robot wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2015 04:19 ZasZ. wrote:On May 14 2015 03:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 13 2015 19:10 kwizach wrote:On May 13 2015 13:31 Wegandi wrote:On May 13 2015 13:26 Yoav wrote:On May 13 2015 13:16 Wegandi wrote:
Check your privilege is incredibly racist towards all those poor white people that have none of this 'privilege' you speak of. Properly described, it encompasses all forms of privilege. Your idea that it is intrinsically racist is a disservice to the notion. Do tell what are these privileges poor Appalachian whites have that are exclusive to white folk? You know who needs some real help in this country? Native Americans. Now, there is some goddamn racism. Here you go. "White privilege" isn't an absolute but a relative notion. The point is that all other things being equal, being white is overall an advantage in our societies compared to not being white. "Privilege" is a just term lazy social justice warriors use because they don't know how to do real research and analysis. Come on man, you know better than that. I know that, as a white straight male, my path through life is easier than it would be if I were not white, not straight, and not male. That's all privilege is. You just don't want to hear the actual message because you don't like the people spouting it. Come to Canada. Wherever I've gone, minorities have been treated equal or better than their white counterparts, lol. It's ranged from the one black guy at my high school being well known and liked by everyone, to me being at a university where whites were just barely the majority, and nobody (except the professors for some reason) gave two shits about race. It's probably different in places like Toronto/Vancouver, but the rest of Canada is quite nice from my experiences.
Wait did I stumble into the Canada thread? Canada isn't perfect, but it's night and day different from the US. Given there's a damn wide range withing the US.
As for trying to be nicer, I'll let whoever wants to try that give it a shot or just let people talk about their ideas for police reform without injecting anything racial for a while.
That's what I'll do. I'll ignore racial issues with policing and see where the discussion goes from there.
|
On May 14 2015 05:13 ZasZ. wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2015 05:04 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 14 2015 04:53 ZasZ. wrote:On May 14 2015 04:44 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 14 2015 04:19 ZasZ. wrote:On May 14 2015 03:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 13 2015 19:10 kwizach wrote:On May 13 2015 13:31 Wegandi wrote:On May 13 2015 13:26 Yoav wrote:On May 13 2015 13:16 Wegandi wrote:
Check your privilege is incredibly racist towards all those poor white people that have none of this 'privilege' you speak of. Properly described, it encompasses all forms of privilege. Your idea that it is intrinsically racist is a disservice to the notion. Do tell what are these privileges poor Appalachian whites have that are exclusive to white folk? You know who needs some real help in this country? Native Americans. Now, there is some goddamn racism. Here you go. "White privilege" isn't an absolute but a relative notion. The point is that all other things being equal, being white is overall an advantage in our societies compared to not being white. "Privilege" is a just term lazy social justice warriors use because they don't know how to do real research and analysis. Come on man, you know better than that. I know that, as a white straight male, my path through life is easier than it would be if I were not white, not straight, and not male. That's all privilege is. You just don't want to hear the actual message because you don't like the people spouting it. Come on man, you should know better than that. Try school. It's both popular and fun. You don't know anything about me. But if you honestly believe that being a straight white male isn't the easiest combination of those three attributes in our day and age, I can see why people struggle to communicate with you in this thread. Being female is arguably more of a privilege than being male. But as I said, 'privilege' is a nebulous term SJWs use to communicate general feelings about a topic. It shouldn't be used in a serious discussion, though, since it relies heavily on anecdotes, suppositions, assumptions and cherry picked data. If you want to be taken seriously, stick to making strong arguments based on data and be prepared to defend that data to criticism, because criticism is good. It makes good ideas and arguments stronger, not weaker, and only bad ideas need fear criticism. Ok, then care to tell me how being female is arguably more of a privilege than being male? I'm drawing blanks except for the fact that men are frequently poorly treated in divorce/custody proceedings. But that hardly makes up for the wage gap, slut shaming, etc. and occurs on a much smaller scale.
Well there is no provable female wage gap. Women are more successful in college, get arrested less often, live longer, are less likely to experience violence and are less likely to die or be injured at work.
|
On May 14 2015 04:34 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2015 04:24 xDaunt wrote:On May 14 2015 03:59 killa_robot wrote:On May 14 2015 03:27 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 14 2015 03:24 killa_robot wrote:On May 14 2015 02:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 14 2015 02:32 xDaunt wrote:On May 14 2015 01:37 Nyxisto wrote:On May 14 2015 00:11 xDaunt wrote:On May 14 2015 00:04 puerk wrote:
[quote]
Because blacks get disproportionally singled out for stop and frisk and general controls. police just poke them more often which creates conflict, which because of very poor police training and 0 anti escalation policies in place, escalates much to often (and much to fast).
Just because there is a breakdown at 3 different stages of police work doesn't mean the racist reason for the first step of the chain is to be ignored. And the fact that Baltimore and its police department are predominantly administered by black people doesn't matter in your analysis? Well and Turkey had a female Prime Minister once, that doesn't mean that the country is more progressive than the US when it comes to women's rights. That some cities are administered by black people doesn't mean that those black people actually care about the problems of their black communities. It wouldn't be the first time in history that politicians don't really care about the poorest people in their communities, no matter what skin colour. I'm not saying that there isn't a problem. I have said repeatedly that there clearly is. I'm only arguing that institutionalized racism isn't the real issue. What makes it not 'real'? Your ability to read? He said it's not the real issue, not that it isn't real. His claim is that we should focus on fixing other things, not that it doesn't exist. I'm saying what makes something 'the real issue'? How is the racial aspect less real than whatever he imagines is 'the real issue'? The issue that affects the everyone. I mean, he literally already said that: It only affects minorities. Policy improvements have to help everyone at once, focussing on a disadvantaged group is affirmative action and reverse racism. Have you not read the thread? Based on what he wrote, he believes police brutality as a whole is the "real" issue. Focusing only on the racial aspect misses the overarching issue that police in general are just too prone to using violence. It's like only saying we need to help black people in poverty when in reality poverty is an issue for all races. Bravo. Couldn't have said it better myself. Forcing race into the equation obfuscates the root problems and divides people, thereby preventing meaningful discourse that will lead to the best solutions. See. I'll translate. Forcing different cancers into the equation obfuscates the root problems and divides people, thereby preventing meaningful discourse that will lead to the best solutions.While there is certainly a grain of truth to both the emphasized part is one of several patently bullshit concepts. The racial aspect shouldn't stop remotely capable adults from meaningful discourse, that's a lazy as crap cop-out, give it up.
The racial aspect is meaningful, but only when you can legitimately point to race as an issue. If you have cops making racist jokes, that is a tangible thing you can protest regarding race.
However, if all you have is an outcome - blacks pulled over more than whites - than you have to dig deeper before you can claim that the different outcome is due to race. Why? Because if you focus on race, and it turns out that something else is the root cause of the different outcome, you will have wasted a lot of time and ruined expectations may lead to further misguided efforts and counter productive activities.
I'll give an example. Lets say a city neighborhood that is primarily black is heavily patrolled by police due to high rates of gang-related violence. As a side effect, more blacks are arrested than whites. In response, police move their efforts to a relatively peaceful white neighborhood and try harder to find reasons to arrest / question whites. While this would help balance the number of blacks and whites being arrested, it would neither help the black neighborhood nor the white neighborhood. The underlying issue is in this example is not race, but rather the gang activity.
Moreover, sticking to the race issue may compound the problem. Blacks could now claim that the police abandoned them because they're racist. Whites would complain about reverse racism, and have a strong incentive to leave to the suburbs. Social ties between whites and blacks would also be strained.
In other words, I'm all for making the police better, but I don't want per-determined problems to be the focus.
|
On May 14 2015 05:13 ZasZ. wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2015 05:04 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 14 2015 04:53 ZasZ. wrote:On May 14 2015 04:44 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 14 2015 04:19 ZasZ. wrote:On May 14 2015 03:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 13 2015 19:10 kwizach wrote:On May 13 2015 13:31 Wegandi wrote:On May 13 2015 13:26 Yoav wrote:On May 13 2015 13:16 Wegandi wrote:
Check your privilege is incredibly racist towards all those poor white people that have none of this 'privilege' you speak of. Properly described, it encompasses all forms of privilege. Your idea that it is intrinsically racist is a disservice to the notion. Do tell what are these privileges poor Appalachian whites have that are exclusive to white folk? You know who needs some real help in this country? Native Americans. Now, there is some goddamn racism. Here you go. "White privilege" isn't an absolute but a relative notion. The point is that all other things being equal, being white is overall an advantage in our societies compared to not being white. "Privilege" is a just term lazy social justice warriors use because they don't know how to do real research and analysis. Come on man, you know better than that. I know that, as a white straight male, my path through life is easier than it would be if I were not white, not straight, and not male. That's all privilege is. You just don't want to hear the actual message because you don't like the people spouting it. Come on man, you should know better than that. Try school. It's both popular and fun. You don't know anything about me. But if you honestly believe that being a straight white male isn't the easiest combination of those three attributes in our day and age, I can see why people struggle to communicate with you in this thread. Being female is arguably more of a privilege than being male. But as I said, 'privilege' is a nebulous term SJWs use to communicate general feelings about a topic. It shouldn't be used in a serious discussion, though, since it relies heavily on anecdotes, suppositions, assumptions and cherry picked data. If you want to be taken seriously, stick to making strong arguments based on data and be prepared to defend that data to criticism, because criticism is good. It makes good ideas and arguments stronger, not weaker, and only bad ideas need fear criticism. Ok, then care to tell me how being female is arguably more of a privilege than being male? I'm drawing blanks except for the fact that men are frequently poorly treated in divorce/custody proceedings. But that hardly makes up for the wage gap, slut shaming, etc. and occurs on a much smaller scale.
Wage gap isn't real dude. At the same level men and women are paid the same, only exceptions are due to men negotiating for more money upfront, while women are less likely to negotiate till later, and more likely to focus on non-monetary forms of compensation.
Slut shamming is an interesting double standard though.
As to why it's more preferable:
- Women are inherently trusted more
- Women can be seen with children without being pedophiles
- Paternity power (not even in custody, but in being the one who makes the absolute choice to keep the child or not)
- Women have more support programs
- Women have more initiative programs, to the point where even though men are now falling behind, focus is still on promoting women
- Women can actually show feelings without being shamed
- Women can work anywhere, while men are still shamed for choosing more "feminine" lines of work
- "Woman and children first" mentality
- Anything to do with relationships. Even now, it's still considered the norm for men to ask women out, propose, etc
Not to say it's all sunshine and rainbows for women, but you're certainly in denial if you think women are still behind men in first world countries.
|
United States43898 Posts
On May 14 2015 04:44 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2015 04:19 ZasZ. wrote:On May 14 2015 03:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 13 2015 19:10 kwizach wrote:On May 13 2015 13:31 Wegandi wrote:On May 13 2015 13:26 Yoav wrote:On May 13 2015 13:16 Wegandi wrote:
Check your privilege is incredibly racist towards all those poor white people that have none of this 'privilege' you speak of. Properly described, it encompasses all forms of privilege. Your idea that it is intrinsically racist is a disservice to the notion. Do tell what are these privileges poor Appalachian whites have that are exclusive to white folk? You know who needs some real help in this country? Native Americans. Now, there is some goddamn racism. Here you go. "White privilege" isn't an absolute but a relative notion. The point is that all other things being equal, being white is overall an advantage in our societies compared to not being white. "Privilege" is a just term lazy social justice warriors use because they don't know how to do real research and analysis. Come on man, you know better than that. I know that, as a white straight male, my path through life is easier than it would be if I were not white, not straight, and not male. That's all privilege is. You just don't want to hear the actual message because you don't like the people spouting it. Come on man, you should know better than that. Try school. It's both popular and fun.
I wouldn't be a resident of the United States today if I had been homosexual. It would not have been legally possible. I was given access to something as a heterosexual that homosexuals are denied. Recognizing that privilege doesn't make me feel bad or guilty or whatever, it just helps me understand better the way that the recognition of gay marriage would impact the quality of life of homosexuals.
|
On May 14 2015 05:33 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2015 04:44 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 14 2015 04:19 ZasZ. wrote:On May 14 2015 03:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 13 2015 19:10 kwizach wrote:On May 13 2015 13:31 Wegandi wrote:On May 13 2015 13:26 Yoav wrote:On May 13 2015 13:16 Wegandi wrote:
Check your privilege is incredibly racist towards all those poor white people that have none of this 'privilege' you speak of. Properly described, it encompasses all forms of privilege. Your idea that it is intrinsically racist is a disservice to the notion. Do tell what are these privileges poor Appalachian whites have that are exclusive to white folk? You know who needs some real help in this country? Native Americans. Now, there is some goddamn racism. Here you go. "White privilege" isn't an absolute but a relative notion. The point is that all other things being equal, being white is overall an advantage in our societies compared to not being white. "Privilege" is a just term lazy social justice warriors use because they don't know how to do real research and analysis. Come on man, you know better than that. I know that, as a white straight male, my path through life is easier than it would be if I were not white, not straight, and not male. That's all privilege is. You just don't want to hear the actual message because you don't like the people spouting it. Come on man, you should know better than that. Try school. It's both popular and fun. I wouldn't be a resident of the United States today if I had been homosexual. It would not have been legally possible. I was given access to something as a heterosexual that homosexuals are denied.
Really? I thought that was changed in the 90's... do you have a source on that?
|
On May 14 2015 05:42 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2015 05:33 KwarK wrote:On May 14 2015 04:44 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 14 2015 04:19 ZasZ. wrote:On May 14 2015 03:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 13 2015 19:10 kwizach wrote:On May 13 2015 13:31 Wegandi wrote:On May 13 2015 13:26 Yoav wrote:On May 13 2015 13:16 Wegandi wrote:
Check your privilege is incredibly racist towards all those poor white people that have none of this 'privilege' you speak of. Properly described, it encompasses all forms of privilege. Your idea that it is intrinsically racist is a disservice to the notion. Do tell what are these privileges poor Appalachian whites have that are exclusive to white folk? You know who needs some real help in this country? Native Americans. Now, there is some goddamn racism. Here you go. "White privilege" isn't an absolute but a relative notion. The point is that all other things being equal, being white is overall an advantage in our societies compared to not being white. "Privilege" is a just term lazy social justice warriors use because they don't know how to do real research and analysis. Come on man, you know better than that. I know that, as a white straight male, my path through life is easier than it would be if I were not white, not straight, and not male. That's all privilege is. You just don't want to hear the actual message because you don't like the people spouting it. Come on man, you should know better than that. Try school. It's both popular and fun. I wouldn't be a resident of the United States today if I had been homosexual. It would not have been legally possible. I was given access to something as a heterosexual that homosexuals are denied. Really? I thought that was changed in the 90's... do you have a source on that?
I think Kwark is just that old.
|
United States43898 Posts
On May 14 2015 05:42 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2015 05:33 KwarK wrote:On May 14 2015 04:44 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 14 2015 04:19 ZasZ. wrote:On May 14 2015 03:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 13 2015 19:10 kwizach wrote:On May 13 2015 13:31 Wegandi wrote:On May 13 2015 13:26 Yoav wrote:On May 13 2015 13:16 Wegandi wrote:
Check your privilege is incredibly racist towards all those poor white people that have none of this 'privilege' you speak of. Properly described, it encompasses all forms of privilege. Your idea that it is intrinsically racist is a disservice to the notion. Do tell what are these privileges poor Appalachian whites have that are exclusive to white folk? You know who needs some real help in this country? Native Americans. Now, there is some goddamn racism. Here you go. "White privilege" isn't an absolute but a relative notion. The point is that all other things being equal, being white is overall an advantage in our societies compared to not being white. "Privilege" is a just term lazy social justice warriors use because they don't know how to do real research and analysis. Come on man, you know better than that. I know that, as a white straight male, my path through life is easier than it would be if I were not white, not straight, and not male. That's all privilege is. You just don't want to hear the actual message because you don't like the people spouting it. Come on man, you should know better than that. Try school. It's both popular and fun. I wouldn't be a resident of the United States today if I had been homosexual. It would not have been legally possible. I was given access to something as a heterosexual that homosexuals are denied. Really? I thought that was changed in the 90's... do you have a source on that?
I came in on a K1 to join my fiance, now my wife. If I'd been gay and wanted to join my male fiance I'd have been shit out of luck. And again I'm not sad or guilty about that. I got lucky. I happened to be straight and my life took me down a path where being straight was really useful. But I accept that I got lucky and that other people didn't.
Also wow, there was a no gays rule in the US until 1990?
|
I agree, being straight, white, black, male and Canadian has really made life a pleasure to experience. I am glad for the privilege to be me. (:
Is that all I have to do for SJWs? That was easy enough.
|
On May 14 2015 05:46 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2015 05:42 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 14 2015 05:33 KwarK wrote:On May 14 2015 04:44 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 14 2015 04:19 ZasZ. wrote:On May 14 2015 03:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 13 2015 19:10 kwizach wrote:On May 13 2015 13:31 Wegandi wrote:On May 13 2015 13:26 Yoav wrote:On May 13 2015 13:16 Wegandi wrote:
Check your privilege is incredibly racist towards all those poor white people that have none of this 'privilege' you speak of. Properly described, it encompasses all forms of privilege. Your idea that it is intrinsically racist is a disservice to the notion. Do tell what are these privileges poor Appalachian whites have that are exclusive to white folk? You know who needs some real help in this country? Native Americans. Now, there is some goddamn racism. Here you go. "White privilege" isn't an absolute but a relative notion. The point is that all other things being equal, being white is overall an advantage in our societies compared to not being white. "Privilege" is a just term lazy social justice warriors use because they don't know how to do real research and analysis. Come on man, you know better than that. I know that, as a white straight male, my path through life is easier than it would be if I were not white, not straight, and not male. That's all privilege is. You just don't want to hear the actual message because you don't like the people spouting it. Come on man, you should know better than that. Try school. It's both popular and fun. I wouldn't be a resident of the United States today if I had been homosexual. It would not have been legally possible. I was given access to something as a heterosexual that homosexuals are denied. Really? I thought that was changed in the 90's... do you have a source on that? I came in on a K1 to join my fiance, now my wife. If I'd been gay and wanted to join my male fiance I'd have been shit out of luck.
Question: I’m a U.S. citizen male, living in Texas, in a long-term relationship with another man, who lives in Costa Rica. We’ve done a lot of traveling back and forth over the years, but never been able to settle down in the same country. The news about DOMA being overturned is very exciting – we’d like to get married and have him join me in the United States. Would a fiance visa work for that? Is it okay that I live in a state where same-sex marriage is not allowed? Answer: A fiance visa (K-1) is indeed available to same-sex couples, based on current immigration law and the U.S. Supreme Court’s overturning of key portions of DOMA. + Show Spoiler +As with other fiances, you would need to prove that you are a U.S. citizen, that the two of you have met within the last two years, that the two of you plan to marry within 90 days of your intended’s entry into the United States, and that your partner is not inadmissible to the U.S. for health, crime, security, past unlawful presence in the U.S., or other reasons. For more on the requirements and procedures, see the “K-1 Fiance Visas” section of Nolo’s website.
After your fiance arrives in the U.S., you will need to get married reasonably soon, in order to prepare to submit your new spouse’s adjustment of status (green card) application. For a list of the U.S. states where you can potentially hold your wedding, see “Same-Sex Marriage Is Now Legal in 13 States and DC.”
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has not been adding any additional hurdles for same-sex couples who get legally married in one state but plan to live in another state where same-sex marriage is not recognized. (There was some early speculation among attorneys that this would go in another direction . . . .)
Nevertheless, given that this aspect of the law is relatively new, it would be wise for you to consult with an experienced immigration attorney for a full, personal analysis and assistance with the paperwork.
And I'd welcome you to have the wedding in NoHo and support my local economy 
Also wow, there was a no gays rule in the US until 1990?
Apparently there was a law passed in the 60's that banned sexual deviants, homosexuals included. No idea how strongly that was enforced or if at all.
|
On May 14 2015 05:57 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2015 05:46 KwarK wrote:On May 14 2015 05:42 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 14 2015 05:33 KwarK wrote:On May 14 2015 04:44 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 14 2015 04:19 ZasZ. wrote:On May 14 2015 03:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 13 2015 19:10 kwizach wrote:On May 13 2015 13:31 Wegandi wrote:On May 13 2015 13:26 Yoav wrote:
[quote]
Properly described, it encompasses all forms of privilege. Your idea that it is intrinsically racist is a disservice to the notion. Do tell what are these privileges poor Appalachian whites have that are exclusive to white folk? You know who needs some real help in this country? Native Americans. Now, there is some goddamn racism. Here you go. "White privilege" isn't an absolute but a relative notion. The point is that all other things being equal, being white is overall an advantage in our societies compared to not being white. "Privilege" is a just term lazy social justice warriors use because they don't know how to do real research and analysis. Come on man, you know better than that. I know that, as a white straight male, my path through life is easier than it would be if I were not white, not straight, and not male. That's all privilege is. You just don't want to hear the actual message because you don't like the people spouting it. Come on man, you should know better than that. Try school. It's both popular and fun. I wouldn't be a resident of the United States today if I had been homosexual. It would not have been legally possible. I was given access to something as a heterosexual that homosexuals are denied. Really? I thought that was changed in the 90's... do you have a source on that? I came in on a K1 to join my fiance, now my wife. If I'd been gay and wanted to join my male fiance I'd have been shit out of luck. Show nested quote +Question: I’m a U.S. citizen male, living in Texas, in a long-term relationship with another man, who lives in Costa Rica. We’ve done a lot of traveling back and forth over the years, but never been able to settle down in the same country. The news about DOMA being overturned is very exciting – we’d like to get married and have him join me in the United States. Would a fiance visa work for that? Is it okay that I live in a state where same-sex marriage is not allowed? Answer: A fiance visa (K-1) is indeed available to same-sex couples, based on current immigration law and the U.S. Supreme Court’s overturning of key portions of DOMA. + Show Spoiler +As with other fiances, you would need to prove that you are a U.S. citizen, that the two of you have met within the last two years, that the two of you plan to marry within 90 days of your intended’s entry into the United States, and that your partner is not inadmissible to the U.S. for health, crime, security, past unlawful presence in the U.S., or other reasons. For more on the requirements and procedures, see the “K-1 Fiance Visas” section of Nolo’s website.
After your fiance arrives in the U.S., you will need to get married reasonably soon, in order to prepare to submit your new spouse’s adjustment of status (green card) application. For a list of the U.S. states where you can potentially hold your wedding, see “Same-Sex Marriage Is Now Legal in 13 States and DC.”
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has not been adding any additional hurdles for same-sex couples who get legally married in one state but plan to live in another state where same-sex marriage is not recognized. (There was some early speculation among attorneys that this would go in another direction . . . .)
Nevertheless, given that this aspect of the law is relatively new, it would be wise for you to consult with an experienced immigration attorney for a full, personal analysis and assistance with the paperwork. SourceAnd I'd welcome you to have the wedding in NoHo and support my local economy Apparently there was a law passed in the 60's that banned sexual deviants, homosexuals included. No idea how strongly that was enforced or if at all.
Your source doesn't disprove Kwark at all though. All it shows is that now gays are allowed to use the K-1 to get in the country. There's no date associated with it.
|
United States43898 Posts
On May 14 2015 06:02 killa_robot wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2015 05:57 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 14 2015 05:46 KwarK wrote:On May 14 2015 05:42 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 14 2015 05:33 KwarK wrote:On May 14 2015 04:44 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 14 2015 04:19 ZasZ. wrote:On May 14 2015 03:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 13 2015 19:10 kwizach wrote:On May 13 2015 13:31 Wegandi wrote:
[quote]
Do tell what are these privileges poor Appalachian whites have that are exclusive to white folk? You know who needs some real help in this country? Native Americans. Now, there is some goddamn racism. Here you go. "White privilege" isn't an absolute but a relative notion. The point is that all other things being equal, being white is overall an advantage in our societies compared to not being white. "Privilege" is a just term lazy social justice warriors use because they don't know how to do real research and analysis. Come on man, you know better than that. I know that, as a white straight male, my path through life is easier than it would be if I were not white, not straight, and not male. That's all privilege is. You just don't want to hear the actual message because you don't like the people spouting it. Come on man, you should know better than that. Try school. It's both popular and fun. I wouldn't be a resident of the United States today if I had been homosexual. It would not have been legally possible. I was given access to something as a heterosexual that homosexuals are denied. Really? I thought that was changed in the 90's... do you have a source on that? I came in on a K1 to join my fiance, now my wife. If I'd been gay and wanted to join my male fiance I'd have been shit out of luck. Question: I’m a U.S. citizen male, living in Texas, in a long-term relationship with another man, who lives in Costa Rica. We’ve done a lot of traveling back and forth over the years, but never been able to settle down in the same country. The news about DOMA being overturned is very exciting – we’d like to get married and have him join me in the United States. Would a fiance visa work for that? Is it okay that I live in a state where same-sex marriage is not allowed? Answer: A fiance visa (K-1) is indeed available to same-sex couples, based on current immigration law and the U.S. Supreme Court’s overturning of key portions of DOMA. + Show Spoiler +As with other fiances, you would need to prove that you are a U.S. citizen, that the two of you have met within the last two years, that the two of you plan to marry within 90 days of your intended’s entry into the United States, and that your partner is not inadmissible to the U.S. for health, crime, security, past unlawful presence in the U.S., or other reasons. For more on the requirements and procedures, see the “K-1 Fiance Visas” section of Nolo’s website.
After your fiance arrives in the U.S., you will need to get married reasonably soon, in order to prepare to submit your new spouse’s adjustment of status (green card) application. For a list of the U.S. states where you can potentially hold your wedding, see “Same-Sex Marriage Is Now Legal in 13 States and DC.”
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has not been adding any additional hurdles for same-sex couples who get legally married in one state but plan to live in another state where same-sex marriage is not recognized. (There was some early speculation among attorneys that this would go in another direction . . . .)
Nevertheless, given that this aspect of the law is relatively new, it would be wise for you to consult with an experienced immigration attorney for a full, personal analysis and assistance with the paperwork. And I'd welcome you to have the wedding in NoHo and support my local economy Also wow, there was a no gays rule in the US until 1990? Apparently there was a law passed in the 60's that banned sexual deviants, homosexuals included. No idea how strongly that was enforced or if at all. Your source doesn't disprove Kwark at all though. All it shows is that now gays are allowed to use the K-1 to get in the country. There's no date associated with it.
I filed in early 2013 for what it's worth. At that time gay marriage was not legal in my state. Also I got my green card last week, it really does take that long to immigrate legally.
|
United States43898 Posts
On May 14 2015 05:56 Wolfstan wrote:
I agree, being straight, white, black, male and Canadian has really made life a pleasure to experience. I am glad for the privilege to be me. (:
Is that all I have to do for SJWs? That was easy enough.
As I understand it, pretty much. It's about understanding that your experience of life, events and scenarios is not always applicable to their life because some people face challenges you do not (and you may face challenges they do not).
|
On May 14 2015 05:32 killa_robot wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2015 05:13 ZasZ. wrote:On May 14 2015 05:04 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 14 2015 04:53 ZasZ. wrote:On May 14 2015 04:44 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 14 2015 04:19 ZasZ. wrote:On May 14 2015 03:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On May 13 2015 19:10 kwizach wrote:On May 13 2015 13:31 Wegandi wrote:On May 13 2015 13:26 Yoav wrote:
[quote]
Properly described, it encompasses all forms of privilege. Your idea that it is intrinsically racist is a disservice to the notion. Do tell what are these privileges poor Appalachian whites have that are exclusive to white folk? You know who needs some real help in this country? Native Americans. Now, there is some goddamn racism. Here you go. "White privilege" isn't an absolute but a relative notion. The point is that all other things being equal, being white is overall an advantage in our societies compared to not being white. "Privilege" is a just term lazy social justice warriors use because they don't know how to do real research and analysis. Come on man, you know better than that. I know that, as a white straight male, my path through life is easier than it would be if I were not white, not straight, and not male. That's all privilege is. You just don't want to hear the actual message because you don't like the people spouting it. Come on man, you should know better than that. Try school. It's both popular and fun. You don't know anything about me. But if you honestly believe that being a straight white male isn't the easiest combination of those three attributes in our day and age, I can see why people struggle to communicate with you in this thread. Being female is arguably more of a privilege than being male. But as I said, 'privilege' is a nebulous term SJWs use to communicate general feelings about a topic. It shouldn't be used in a serious discussion, though, since it relies heavily on anecdotes, suppositions, assumptions and cherry picked data. If you want to be taken seriously, stick to making strong arguments based on data and be prepared to defend that data to criticism, because criticism is good. It makes good ideas and arguments stronger, not weaker, and only bad ideas need fear criticism. Ok, then care to tell me how being female is arguably more of a privilege than being male? I'm drawing blanks except for the fact that men are frequently poorly treated in divorce/custody proceedings. But that hardly makes up for the wage gap, slut shaming, etc. and occurs on a much smaller scale. Wage gap isn't real dude. At the same level men and women are paid the same, only exceptions are due to men negotiating for more money upfront, while women are less likely to negotiate till later, and more likely to focus on non-monetary forms of compensation. Slut shamming is an interesting double standard though. As to why it's more preferable: - Women are inherently trusted more - Women can be seen with children without being pedophiles - Paternity power (not even in custody, but in being the one who makes the absolute choice to keep the child or not) - Women have more support programs - Women have more initiative programs, to the point where even though men are now falling behind, focus is still on promoting women - Women can actually show feelings without being shamed - Women can work anywhere, while men are still shamed for choosing more "feminine" lines of work - "Woman and children first" mentality - Anything to do with relationships. Even now, it's still considered the norm for men to ask women out, propose, etc Not to say it's all sunshine and rainbows for women, but you're certainly in denial if you think women are still behind men in first world countries.
Deny the wage gap if you want, but I've witnessed it first-hand in my workplace and even stand to benefit from it because the leadership at my company just doesn't get the bigger picture. It's caused a couple of friends of mind to leave and seek better opportunities elsewhere. Obviously this is an anecdote, but it is an example of how sexism in the workplace is a real problem.
As to your list:
-Are they? I don't know what your basis is for this claim.
-Do you assume men with children are pedophiles or something? I just assume he's their father unless I see weird behavior.
-Sure, this may be unfair, but its biologically driven and a fairly niche situation. If men are so concerned about not being able to terminate their partner's pregnancy, they should probably be using protection. Problem solved. Plus, if I wanted to include biological unfairness, I would have included pregnancy on my list for women.
-Women have more support programs because society has decided women need them more than men. That's like claiming affirmative action is a benefit to being black or that your power ranger bandaid is a benefit to cutting your arm open. We wouldn't need these programs if the underlying problems didn't exist.
-What is an initiative program?
-Shamed by who? Women who show their feelings in the workplace or to anyone other than their friends or lovers are still shamed, and men who aren't allowed to express feelings to their friends or lovers should find new friends and lovers.
-Like being a male nurse? That stigma doesn't really exist anymore, and there are plenty of professions that women struggle to get into compared to men. Again the difference here is that while men may be "shamed" for working as a male nurse, they still have no problem actually getting hired as a male nurse. I'd rather be shamed and have a job than the other way around.
-Tradition is a strange bird, I won't argue with you there. But these customs have changed over time and will continue to change as society improves. It's a far more equal landscape on this front than it was even when I was in high school like 10 years ago.
|
It came with the Supreme court striking down some of DOMA
In a recent development due to the U.S. Supreme Court's striking down a discriminatory provision of the Defense of Marriage Act, U.S. citizens can now sponsor their same-sex fiancé for a visa. The requirements are the same as for any other fiancé visa, except that you and your fiancé must legally marry in one of the states that recognizes same-sex marriage. A civil union or domestic partnership will not (under USCIS policy as of early 2014) count as a "marriage" to fulfill the requirement that those entering the U.S. on a fiancé visa must marry within 90 days. Therefore, if you currently reside in a state that does not issue full marriage licenses to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered ("LGBT") couples, you must plan to travel to and legally marry in a state that DOES recognize same-sex marriage. However, it is not necessary that you make that state your home after you get married.
Source
As the bold shows one wouldn't be able to use a 'civil union' or 'domestic partnership', and this was obviously recent and didn't happen without strong opposition.
|
On May 14 2015 05:56 Wolfstan wrote:
I agree, being straight, white, black, male and Canadian has really made life a pleasure to experience. I am glad for the privilege to be me. (:
Is that all I have to do for SJWs? That was easy enough.
Pretty much, yeah. That's really all you, or I for that matter, can contribute to the conversation when people are talking about difficulties they experience as being part of a marginalized group. I can't possibly understand what it's like, all I can really do is try to avoid propagating it in my daily life and when I become a project manager or get put in a position of leadership, to not let prejudice or bias prevent me from assembling the best team and producing the best product, and to also let people know when I think they are letting their prejudices or biases affect their judgment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
