• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

Social Justice White/Straight/Cis/Male Privilege

birdup.snaildown said:
White women in Australia are suffering are they? News to me. I know lots of women. What do they "have to go through"?

Your statement is too broad, which is problem with white male privilege in general. It's not a useful term.

Women in Saudi Arabia are probably suffering relative to men. I've never been there. I don't know any Saudi women, but I gather it is quite oppressive.

White women in Australia pointing fingers at men and saying privilege is SUCH hypocritical bullshit.
Click to expand...

deficiT said:
How often do you have to deal with unwanted sexual advances as a man? Most women go through that quite often, that is just one example. Sexual assault is ridiculously common for women.

Your comment is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. You don't know what women go through because you're not a woman so you don't have to worry about it.

No one's saying women are "suffering" and that's not the point of the term privilege.
Click to expand...

The interesting thing in Australia at present is the issue of domestic and sexual violence which disproportionally effects women.

However as usual the media narrative obscures the social reality. There is something of an ‘epidemic’ of such violence but it has two characteristics:

1. Although the primary anti-violence activists are white women, the principal victims of such violence are indigenous women and women from ethnic communities - so you could say white women are particularly privileged in not suffering violence as other types of women do.

2. The data is often compiled in such a way that it conflates a sexist pat on the backside with a violent assault within the overarching narrative of ‘epidemic of sexual violence’. It is true that around 52 Australian women will be murdered by a current or former intimate partner or family member. However the definition of ‘violence’ has been stretched beyond all meaningful usage to portray Australian culture very cynically.
 
mal3volent said:
plenty of annoying straight white males left here, don't worry. They ganged up on me earlier and I actually kinda liked it.



I agree that what we done to the native Americans gets overlooked too often when we have discussions about racial justice. I think we should talk more about it. That being said, more has been done for the descendants of the native tribes than has been done for the descendants of the African slaves.

btw daisy, white privilege isn't a "lazy" term. It's been studied quite extensively by many people including non Americans. I'd welcome you to tell me why it's "lazy". Former and current cops have admitted that they profile black men as dangerous. The whole stop and frisk disaster was engineered so they could search non whites at will without having to establish any pretext.
Click to expand...


I feel "white privilege " is lazy and is probably the root cause of white straight men getting in a bad temper when they decide to contribute to threads like these.

It is lazy because people who respond to posts made with some effort and thought with dumb catchphrases are no better than the mob of rats or trolls same said people whined about when THEY were targets of dumb catchphrases.

Its a silly and smug way of getting the upper hand in a debate with no thought or effort knowing damn well the person its addressed to will get annoyed with not getting a decent reply.

Then when threads go on a while and the guys read this stupid shit and get even more annoyed tempers flare, its p obv it won't end well

No, its not useful, no more than any dumb trendy term. Ali still loses his shit over being a sjw cuck thing and no one has bothered with that in years.

Anyway nip, the thread too confusing, couldn't possibly be the drugs.
 
deficiT said:
How is it not balanced?? There's like 21 pages worth of fragile men crying foul in this thread alone.
Click to expand...

It's not helpful to say "fragile men" and it's a perfect example of what is wrong with this discussion. I acknowledge that a lot of men have expressed their frustrations in this thread, but maybe there is a reason for that. If you want to listen to people, as you said, why call them fragile? The title of the thread isn't balanced. If this is a discussion about privilege and women also experience privilege, it should be titled White /Straight /Cis privilege... but, then, racial minorities have privilege in some countries too so we should drop the white... or maybe the title could be White /Black /Asian /Straight /Gay /Cis /Male /Female privilege?
 
Last edited:
birdup.snaildown said:
It's not helpful to say "fragile men" and it's a perfect example of what is wrong with this discussion. I acknowledge that a lot of men have expressed their frustrations in this thread, but maybe there is a reason for that. If you want to listen to people, as you said, why call them fragile? The title of the thread isn't balanced. If this is a discussion about privilege and women also experience privilege, it should be titled White /Straight /Cis privilege... but, then, racial minorities have privilege in some countries too so we should drop the white... or maybe the title could be White /Black /Asian /Straight /Gay /Cis /Male /Female privilege?
Click to expand...

Do you think part of your negative reaction toward the idea of white male privilege is that you think it diminishes your accomplishments in life?
 
I really think class warfare is at the root of all these so-called intersectional issues.

When people have money, property, prosperity, safety and security, they are immediately more acceptable to everyone around them.

These ivory tower academics have created an entire mythical framework that pits people against one another, and it's all based on their privilege as wealthy academics extracting stories and stats from spaces they aren't part of.

I look at some of the bougie people in hollywood who are POC, trans, even disabled... they've got it made. They curate their own social circles, they have media presence, they can create platforms for themselves. It's because they have money.

When you have money, people can't touch you, no matter what your background.

I feel that progressivism is targeting the wrong things. Most progressive activists I know are lucky if they can achieve middle class status. That, or they are ivory tower academics. Progressivism has all the different demographics eating one another. Really, what people need is good material foundation in life, which is the precise thing that is eroding in the United States. People are getting poorer by the year while the rich pigs are sequestering wealth in the trillions.

When society is plush and everyone can prosper, you see way fewer social problems.

The vast majority of our social problems are because of class warfare.
 
Foreigner said:
I really think class warfare is at the root of all these so-called intersectional issues.

When people have money, property, prosperity, safety and security, they are immediately more acceptable to everyone around them.

These ivory tower academics have created an entire mythical framework that pits people against one another, and it's all based on their privilege as wealthy academics extracting stories and stats from spaces they aren't part of.

I look at some of the bougie people in hollywood who are POC, trans, even disabled... they've got it made. They curate their own social circles, they have media presence, they can create platforms for themselves. It's because they have money.

When you have money, people can't touch you, no matter what your background.

I feel that progressivism is targeting the wrong things. Most progressive activists I know are lucky if they can achieve middle class status. That, or they are ivory tower academics. Progressivism has all the different demographics eating one another. Really, what people need is good material foundation in life, which is the precise thing that is eroding in the United States. People are getting poorer by the year while the rich pigs are sequestering wealth in the trillions.

When society is plush and everyone can prosper, you see way fewer social problems.

The vast majority of our social problems are because of class warfare.
Click to expand...

Do you think all poor people struggle the same amount, or do you think other factors such as gender and race could add even more disadvantages to their lives?
 
mal3volent said:
Do you think all poor people struggle the same amount, or do you think other factors such as gender and race could add even more disadvantages to their lives?
Click to expand...

I think when people are angry at someone, or look down at someone for doing what they need to do to survive, they will see their race, gender, etc. a lot more than if the person is living a normal, stable life.

There's a lot of people out there who, when you cut them off in traffic, want to SEE who the person is who did it. Are they ethnic? Which gender are they? Are they old or young? They want to know because in their low-vibe emotional state these things matter.

The poor will always be marginalized in any way possible, using any of their identifiable features, because that's how class prejudice works.

When people have class elevation, they are immediately seen as having more merit, and this tends to override most prejudices. It's why Asians aren't as demonized in our society... because they tend to be as prosperous as whites, if not more so.
 
mal3volent said:
Do you think part of your negative reaction toward the idea of white male privilege is that you think it diminishes your accomplishments in life?
Click to expand...

No, not even remotely. I've been talking about men and women in Australia. If the discussion isn't about men having a harder time than women in Australia (as @deficiT said it is not) then your statement makes no sense. I don't believe that women have a harder time in Australia than men. Do you?

I don't like double standards. I can't go into the BLM thread and call black people fragile without people reacting negatively. So, we should be consistent.

I don't think privilege is a sensible word, but it's not the word that bothers me.

More importantly: I don't think it is helpful to reinforce a victim complex in anyone. I don't think it's helpful to repeatedly tell women that they are disadvantaged. (EDIT: not denying that men/women have certain disadvantages.) There is a false narrative about the wage gap. There is a false narrative about police brutality, re: BLM. I don't think it's helpful to convince people of conspiracy theories.

What is the solution to so-called privilege? It seems to me like all the solutions have failed. Giving people an advantage because of the colour of their skin is flawed. That's (ironically) what the whole problem is in the first place. You don't fix the problem by doubling down on it.

As @Foreigner said, it should be about class. That's the real issue. It isn't skin colour.

Going on about white privilege is racist and it solves nothing. I don't like racism and I don't like to see society chasing it's tail. This discussion does nothing more than belittle a particular race / gender / sexuality. This is (as far as I'm concerned): racist, sexist, and heterophobic.

I honestly do not believe BLM is the best approach to solve racial problems in the United States... and I honestly do not believe talking about racial privilege is a good approach either.

I've lived in countries in Africa and Asia that have distinct disadvantages if you're white. The issue is more complex than buzz words like privilege. White people tend to see the Western world as the entire world, which is far from the truth.
 
Last edited:
Let's be real if I made a point about class I'd find a dozen of the same posters Simping for the wealthy.
 
@deficiT

Are you talking about me? I, for one, wouldn't react in the same way (at all) if you posted a thread about class.

I don't hate the wealthy as much as others do, but there is definitely a wealth inequality issue. I know a lot of wealthy people (I am not one of them) and I think it's disgusting how wasteful they are. I read an article the other day about somebody buying a sealed rare copy of Super Mario Bros from the 1980's for AUD $900,000. That sort of shit makes me sick on a regular basis. Then there's celebrities like Jay Leno who make TV shows about how many expensive cars they own. I don't know how they sleep at night.

A lot of wealthy people in white countries are white, but that doesn't mean the issue is about skin colour rather than wealth. There are poor white people in Australia. There are poor white people in America. These groups are neglected because the discussion is about skin colour and they are white.

deficiT said:
I never claimed to know what it's like to be a woman, I just listen to what women tell me about their lived experience.
Click to expand...

It seems like you not only don't listen to men, you call them fragile. You are a man (I think) but you haven't lived my life. Perhaps there are valid lived experiences on both sides of the gender spectrum?

All I'm saying is: if we're going to talk about privilege as it pertains to certain demographics, it should be balanced.

This discussion doesn't bother me as much as you might think it does. I'm not upset at all. I don't care. I'm just putting my opinion out there. At the end of the day, nobody IRL talks to me about privilege. I think the majority of Australians are on my side of the fence on this one, but - hey - I could be wrong. I have certainly encountered far-left people in the past that like to talk about how everyone has advantages except white men.
 
birdup.snaildown said:
@deficiT

Are you talking about me? I, for one, wouldn't react in the same way (at all) if you posted a thread about class.

I don't hate the wealthy as much as others do, but there is definitely a wealth inequality issue. I know a lot of wealthy people (I am not one of them) and I think it's disgusting how wasteful they are. I read an article the other day about somebody buying a sealed rare copy of Super Mario Bros from the 1980's for AUD $900,000. That sort of shit makes me sick on a regular basis. Then there's celebrities like Jay Leno who make TV shows about how many expensive cars they own. I don't know how they sleep at night.

A lot of wealthy people in white countries are white, but that doesn't mean the issue is about skin colour rather than wealth. There are poor white people in Australia. There are poor white people in America. These groups are neglected because the discussion is about skin colour and they are white.



It seems like you not only don't listen to men, you call them fragile. You are a man (I think) but you haven't lived my life. Perhaps there are valid lived experiences on both sides of the gender spectrum?

All I'm saying is: if we're going to talk about privilege as it pertains to certain demographics, it should be balanced.

This discussion doesn't bother me as much as you might think it does. I'm not upset at all. I don't care. I'm just putting my opinion out there. At the end of the day, nobody IRL talks to me about privilege. I think the majority of Australians are on my side of the fence on this one, but - hey - I could be wrong. I have certainly encountered far-left people in the past that like to talk about how everyone has advantages except white men.
Click to expand...
There are valid experiences no matter what race, sex, etc. people are, I never said there wasn't. You are either putting words in my mouth or drawing incorrect conclusions. Stop taking things so personally I made a joke.
 
I'm not taking it personally. Not upset in the slightest.
Would you make the same joke about black people?
If not, why not?

If there are advantages and disadvantages being white and male, the title of the thread doesn't strike me as particularly inclusive. It's odd that all of these discussions exclude the same groups. Why?

This is an international forum, but the discussion is very much focused on the Western privilege model. The male/female thing is the strangest part. It's insulting to indigenous people and trans people to talk about (the lack of) white female privilege in the same breath. White women in this country are on PAR with white men. Maybe there's a little difference, but it is so slight it's difficult to pinpoint it.

If the title of the thread was White/Asian/Straight/Cis Western Privilege, I'd be less likely to question it... :unsure:

Feminism bothers me for the same reason. Feminists say third wave feminism is about gender equality (not specifically for women) in the same way that this thread is supposedly about equality... Why not call it something else that doesn't exclude people? I think it is being approached in the wrong way.
 
I think there is an overlap between the points made by @deficiT and @birdup.snaildown regarding wealth and class. For the most part, wealthy women, black or LGBTQI people can breeze through life never experiencing any form of discrimination whatsoever. In Australia such people probably only have to make it to the upper middle class (the professions, senior executives etc) before they’ve almost entirely exited the discriminatory zone. Yet the total academic and media emphasis on the discrimination and bigotry against these groups for their racial or sexual/gender characteristics totally obscures the more significant problem of wealth inequality.

I could write a whole list of wealthy women, Aborigines and LGBTQI people in Australia with huge social and cultural power. However, given the rapid growth of the Grievance Industry less wealthy people from these categories are developing a large amount of institutional power with which they can bring down more senior and more wealthy people via charges of discrimination. The whole situation is in a state of great flux but I for one, believe that growth in the overall income level and the equity of income and wealth distribution ameliorates most forms of discrimination.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top