Anti-white Prejudice - does it exist?

[sothereiwas]

12 minutes ago, Emilie Jolie said:

When enough racists get into power and enact their beliefs in the institutions they have power over, it becomes a system.

I can't argue against that. For instance, in the current case against Harvard, there is evidence that a systematic policy exists that requires (for example) Asian applicants to have a much higher SAT score than other applicants. This does not mean Harvard University has animated, become self aware, and developed a belief system. What it means is that there is a demonstrable pattern of racially discriminatory outcomes that indicate a policy has been implemented. Other evidence might include a written policy or guidance that implements such a set of outcomes. 

If we're OK with using 'racist' a bit colloquially then I think it's fine, and close enough. 

[elaine567]

1 hour ago, Emilie Jolie said:

for no other reason than your skin colour or race. 

No other reason apart from the fact you(gen) are also in the minority...
Can minorities ever really expect to be seen as equals?
 

Edited July 7, 2020 by elaine567

[sothereiwas]

11 minutes ago, elaine567 said:

Can minorities ever really expect to be seen as equals?

Men are a minority. Discuss

[elaine567]

2 minutes ago, sothereiwas said:

Men are a minority. Discuss

"Like most sexual species, the sex ratio in humans is close to 1:1. In humans, the natural ratio between males and females at birth is slightly biased towards the male sex, being estimated to be about 1.05 or 1.06 or within a narrow range from 1.03 to 1.06 males/per female born..."

[Emilie Jolie]

It's completely OT for this thread.

Still, I'd already had a look at that when another poster used that example on another thread, though it would be helpful if you could quote your sources. There is, so far, no evidence of systemic discrimination against Asian students at Harvard in favour of black, white and latino applicants, since a district judge rejected the claim on the basis that the numbers of Asian students admitted to Harvard have consistently been going up. 

I saw the claim was made by a conservative student who didn't get in. Maybe he wasn't good enough? Maybe it was a political operation whereby he wanted to launch his political career? I guess it's up to the Supreme Court to decide now.

My source: Harvard University cleared of racial bias in admissions process, BBC News Online, 1 Oct. 2019.

 

Besides that, Harvard doesn't make or reflect the laws of the country; it's a private business whose recruitment process only applies to itself. 

Not a good example of specific anti-white bias in any event.

2 minutes ago, sothereiwas said:

For instance, in the current case against Harvard, there is evidence that a systematic policy exists that requires (for example) Asian applicants to have a much higher SAT score than other applicants

 

[Emilie Jolie]

18 minutes ago, elaine567 said:

Can minorities ever really expect to be seen as equals?

Yes. There is no obvious reason that any person should be less equal than another. 

[sothereiwas]

3 minutes ago, elaine567 said:

"Like most sexual species, the sex ratio in humans is close to 1:1. In humans, the natural ratio between males and females at birth is slightly biased towards the male sex, being estimated to be about 1.05 or 1.06 or within a narrow range from 1.03 to 1.06 males/per female born..."

Just to play one more round: "In 2017, there were 165.92 million women in the United States, compared to 159.41 million men. By 2024, it is projected that there will be 173.9 million women and 167.08 million men in the U.S." - statista.com

 

1 minute ago, Emilie Jolie said:

It's completely OT for this thread.

It's just an example of an allegation. Also, the fact that polices were racially discriminatory wasn't disproved, it was just decided (so far, under appeal) that sometimes racial discrimination is OK. Which seems spot on. 

[elaine567]

2 minutes ago, sothereiwas said:

Just to play one more round: "In 2017, there were 165.92 million women in the United States, compared to 159.41 million men. By 2024, it is projected that there will be 173.9 million women and 167.08 million men in the U.S." - statista.com

The US does not equal the world...

[elaine567]

6 minutes ago, Emilie Jolie said:

There is no obvious reason that any person should be less equal than another. 

We all know about "should" but that is not reality.

[Emilie Jolie]

Just now, elaine567 said:

We all know about "should" but that is not reality.

Strange, isn't it...

[major_merrick]

8 hours ago, Prudence V said:

Where I grew up, the origin was fear. And experience. White people were the ones who would kick your door down in the middle of the night, and drag your husband / wife / kid away, and you’d never see them again. White people were the ones who stuck you in a s***ty school, and made you speak their clumsy language, and beat you if you spoke your own. White people were the ones who policed your hair, your posture, your ways of being and relating. White people were just evil. Not every white person, but evil always wore a white skin. So black people grew up hating whiteness, warned their kids about whiteness, were afraid of whiteness. 

Interesting how you describe your growing up years.  I can understand a great deal of how that upbringing was difficult. 

Mine were almost exactly how you describe it, except for having my hair "policed."  My hair just made me a target...the only blonde on the block.  In your description, switch the words "white" and "black" into opposite places and it is so similar to my early life.  Granted, I didn't speak English until school age and that set me back a lot compared to other folks.  Another difference is that I never saw black people as forcing me to live where I lived.  Poverty did that, but it was inescapable until I got old enough to leave.  I got a crap education in a dump of a school with asbestos hanging out of the ceiling and lamps powered by extension cords duct taped to the wall. 

Due to racial conflict, I grew up hating blackness.  The fear of seeing more than one black person on the opposite side of the street because it meant a potential confrontation or other trouble.  I got called names pretty much all the time.  As the only blonde around, I was easily spotted and targeted.  I learned to be violent because I had to be.  The threat of rape was ever-present.  My husband was shot defending me from attempted rape.  Black folks thought it was great fun to rape a white girl.   One of our friends was raped for that reason, and committed suicide.   Of course there were the threats of assault on me and my friends, the murders in the neighborhood.   

My husband and I survived all of this.  We buried our dead and mourned in our own ways and we left.  And as I lived elsewhere, I found out that the "enemy" that I had feared wasn't really the enemy.  The system was the enemy, the same system that kept black folks down.  The system has it in for the poor, common, unable-to-make-it folks.  My husband's Wife #2 has a similar (if not worse) story and she's from Mexico.  Those in power want us tearing each other to pieces over the crumbs from their table. 

So I left my hatred of other groups of people behind, although I retain my understanding of WHY people hate each other.  I instead developed a hatred for the system, and for government.  It took me years to overcome my fear of people who are of different ethnicities, and to learn what I know now - that evil is part of the human experience in a world full of sin.  That evil isn't limited to one skin color, but lurks inside everybody.  Power especially brings that evil out.  Any kind of power will do it, whether being a dominant group, having more money, etc...  As the saying goes, "power corrupts." 

The American ideal has always been to limit individual and group power.  It hasn't worked out nearly as well as our Founders wanted, and they were as human and flawed as anybody else.  But the ideas they had were some of the best I've run into.  I'm hoping we can get rid of this system that has escaped all of our control and get back to basics.   And I hope that if we achieve that, black folks, white folks, native folks, and all of us can be friends. 

One thing my husband said recently that stuck in my mind: He reminded me that we are all descendants of Adam and Eve, Noah, and the original humans that God created.  As such, we're all one big family.  And one issue that sin has caused in our lives is that nobody can hurt us quite as badly as family can.  And yet, here we are...stuck with each other and we have to find a way to make it work out. 

3 hours ago, Cookiesandough said:

I don't know. I could be wrong, but separating racial prejudice and racism seems like a bit of a tautology to me. If a person is experiencing negative treatment because of prejudice  skin color, that is racism to me. And that happens to white people all the time.

Yeah.  It seems like splitting hairs.  Especially when the OP uses the word "prejudice" in the title (which is somehow individual) rather than "racism" which is somehow systemic. 

[Cookiesandough]

9 hours ago, Emilie Jolie said:

They don't mean the same thing, so I don't know it can be a tautology...

Individuals are prejudiced, a whole system is racist.

A racist system made of people who thinks their race is better than yours can be perfectly nice to your face; they just think your race will always be inferior, and will make sure the society you both live in doesn't give you the same rights, for no other reason than your skin colour or race. It affects every aspect of your life and that of those who look like you (education, employment opportunities,...).

A prejudiced individual will not like you or what you represent, based on the colour of your skin; it affects you emotionally.

Idk that actually seems like splitting hairs to me.  I agree racism is believing in inferiority/superiority based upon race, but seems redundant to separate the same  beliefs held by one person vs. many. The difference is just how the beliefs are implemented. The ‘system’ you’re describing would be harmless until seen through racial prejudice, discrimination, or aggression.etc. 

Edited July 8, 2020 by Cookiesandough

[Emilie Jolie]

23 minutes ago, Cookiesandough said:

Idk that actually seems like splitting hairs to me.  I agree racism is believing in inferiority/superiority based upon race, but seems redundant to separate the same  beliefs held by one person vs. many. The difference is just how the beliefs are implemented. The ‘system’ you’re describing would be harmless until seen through racial prejudice, discrimination, or aggression.etc. 

You can think what you want, cookies. I've not come up with the distinction myself, I'm not the only one who uses it - I think it's actually pretty widely accepted in general, and I'm completely baffled that posters have been caring that much about it. Could be a cultural difference. I'm calling it anti‐white prejudice to mark a difference between casual racism and systemic racism. The former currently exists against whites, but not the latter. I can see why some may want to conveniently blur the lines, but the difference seems major enough to me that it warrants using 2 different words.

I'm much more interested in discussing the whys and hows of anti-white racial prejudice, as I have tried to say repeatedly. If you have something to add in terms of why you think anti-white bias / prejudice / casual racism / discrimination / whatever reflects your sensitivities more, go for it!

Edited July 8, 2020 by Emilie Jolie

[Cookiesandough]

25 minutes ago, Emilie Jolie said:

You think what you want, cookies. I've not come up with the distinction myself, I'm not the one who uses it - I think it's actually pretty widely accepted in general, and I'm completely baffled that posters have been caring that much about it.

I'm much more interested in discussing the whys and hows of anti-white racial prejudice, as I have tried to say repeatedly. If you have something to add in terms of why you think anti-white bias / prejudice / casual racism / discrimination / whatever reflects your sensitivities more, go for it.

I think the reason it’s being mentioned is because it seems to underpin much of the argument against ‘anti-white prejudice.’  There’s a distinction drawn between the racially motivated prejudice/discrimination/violence/hatred committed against white people(which of course happens)  and that of other races because of the notion that it is only racism if it’s systemic or widely held by a dominant culture or something, and in my opinion;  that’s simply not true.

Edited July 8, 2020 by Cookiesandough

[elaine567]

I don't really think it helps the cause by  adopting the word "racism"and telling "the other side" that they cannot use the word to describe something that they have experienced.
That leads to frustration and anger and an alienation of some who may have been supportive.
"My pain is worse than your pain" is not usually a stance that garners a lot of sympathy.
 

[Emilie Jolie]

13 minutes ago, elaine567 said:

I don't really think it helps the cause by  adopting the word "racism"and telling "the other side" that they cannot use the word to describe something that they have experienced.
That leads to frustration and anger and an alienation of some who may have been supportive.
"My pain is worse than your pain" is not usually a stance that garners a lot of sympathy.
 

It's not a pain level thing, elaine. It's disingenuous to claim as much, unless you haven't read the whole thread. It's a definition thing.

Jim Crow laws are not the same as being insulted or treated badly as an individual for being white. I can completely understand how people would want to make that distinction irrelevant, because helps purge the sins of the past, but a guilty conscience is no reason to rewrite history. 

[Emilie Jolie]

I'll just add playing on emotions is exactly the type of populist clap-trap that aggravates a 'culture war' that really doesn't need to exist.

How can anyone equate segregationist laws imposed on every black person in the USA (as an example) to individual or group anti-white racial discrimination with a straight face is bewildering. 

If the argument is about 'splitting hairs', using prejudice rather than 'racism' shouldn't cause that much indignation.

If it's about 'not caring' about individual people's experience, that's false. 

Have white individuals been subjected to prejudice or discrimination based on skin colour? Yes. 

Is it bad? Yes.

That's racial prejudice.

Have all whites as a race been subjected to Jim Crow like laws? No.

That's institutional racism.

Simple.

 

Edited July 8, 2020 by Emilie Jolie

[Cookiesandough]

If you’re talking about racism that is legislated, of course it is worse than casual racism. Of course it’s worse the more prevalent it is within a society. I think few would disagree with that. However, individuals create laws and systems. They don’t come about alone. White people have been attacked simply on the basis of their race. They’ve been excluded and discriminated against. Call it “anti white” , but  doesn’t change the motive  because someone decided to usurp a term to purposefully exclude them

Edited July 8, 2020 by Cookiesandough

[Emilie Jolie]

3 minutes ago, Cookiesandough said:

If you’re talking about racism that is legislated, of course it is worse than casual racism..I think few would disagree with that. However, individuals create laws and systems. They don’t come about alone. White people have been attacked simply on the basis of their race. They’ve been excluded and discriminated against. Call it “anti white” , but  doesn’t change the motive  because someone decided to usurp a term to purposefully exclude them

Yeah, that's what I was thinking - this indicates a dash of paranoia at what minorities could do to the whites in response to how the whites have been treating them if whites became a minority themselves, based on nothing concrete but a guilty conscience and anectodal evidence. 

Asking for equal rights is not a threat to whiteness in and of itself, and ensuring all people are equal would most likely be the best way to stop the viscious circle of tit for tat prejudices.

 

[Cookiesandough]

1 hour ago, elaine567 said:

I don't really think it helps the cause by  adopting the word "racism"and telling "the other side" that they cannot use the word to describe something that they have experienced.
That leads to frustration and anger and an alienation of some who may have been supportive.
"My pain is worse than your pain" is not usually a stance that garners a lot of sympathy.
 

Yep and when you marginalize something that far, you get questions such as if they can even experience prejudice

Edited July 8, 2020 by Cookiesandough

[Emilie Jolie]

11 minutes ago, Cookiesandough said:

Yep and when you marginalize something that far, you get questions such as if prejudice can even be perpetrated against them.  

There is anecdotal evidence of anti-white bias though no marginalisation that I'm aware of, unless you're claiming the majority of non-whites are pulling together to hate on the whites and everyone is keeping quiet about it for some reason? That's the only way this marginalisation argument would make sense, logically speaking.

 If so, I'm interested in the data behind that claim. I don't do conspiracy theories or 'leftist' plots, but would welcome a reliable, credible, apolitical source to support the argument that anti-white prejudice is being marginalised with an open mind.

Edited July 8, 2020 by Emilie Jolie

[introverted1]

14 hours ago, Emilie Jolie said:

Individuals are prejudiced, a whole system is racist.

 

This is clearly not popular usage of "racist."  Individuals are routinely labeled as "racist" in the media and in conventional usage. 

2 hours ago, Emilie Jolie said:

There is anecdotal evidence of anti-white bias though no marginalisation that I'm aware of, unless you're claiming the majority of non-whites are pulling together to hate on the whites and everyone is keeping quiet about it for some reason? That's the only way this marginalisation argument would make sense, logically speaking.

 If so, I'm interested in the data behind that claim. I don't do conspiracy theories or 'leftist' plots, but would welcome a reliable, credible, apolitical source to support the argument that anti-white prejudice is being marginalised with an open mind.

I posted some examples previously.  Majority groups, whatever their makeup, tend to favor their own and systems and laws spring from that.

Edited July 8, 2020 by introverted1

[Emilie Jolie]

32 minutes ago, introverted1 said:

The data is as I posted before (with examples).  Majority groups, whatever their makeup, tend to favor their own and systems and laws spring from that.

Anecdotal personal evidence on why people group together as a preference isn't data, sorry. Also doesn't explain why people of different groupings would hate on each other - which is where prejudice comes into play. 

Your personal experience, while interesting, also doesn't explain why anti-white bias is being marginalised (which was the claim put forward).

 

32 minutes ago, introverted1 said:

This is clearly not popular usage of "racist."  Individuals are routinely labeled as "racist" in the media and in conventional usage. 

For the purpose of this thread, as I repeatedly offered, I'm using racial prejudice to mean individual experiences, and racism to mean systemic racism. 

 

 

 

 

[introverted1]

Quote

Anecdotal personal evidence on why people group together as a preference isn't data, sorry. Also doesn't explain why people of different groupings would hate on each other - which is where prejudice comes into play. 

 I gave examples from Africa, Ireland, and South Korea.

4 minutes ago, Emilie Jolie said:

For the purpose of this thread, as I repeatedly offered, I'm using racial prejudice to mean individual experiences, and racism to mean systemic racism.

I understand that you have explained your usage, but that is nonetheless inconsistent with conventional usage and people are likely to "see" and use terms are they know them.

[Emilie Jolie]

8 minutes ago, introverted1 said:

 I gave examples from Africa, Ireland, and South Korea.

I understand that you have explained your usage, but that is nonetheless inconsistent with conventional usage and people are likely to "see" and use terms are they know them.

I must have missed one of your posts, I'll have a look back.

Agree to disagree on the rest. That we can't move forward from semantics is crazy to me, but I see why it's hard to admit past deeds, so filing everything under generic 'racism' becomes super tempting; it allows perpetual denial and paranoia-induced projection.