racial privilege

[Soulful]

I'm curious what your thoughts are about racial privilege? for those of you who are familiar with the term "white privilege", do you agree with the idea?

for those unfamiliar, white privilege is the idea that white persons experience (often invisible to them) privilege based on their skin colour that persons of other racial groups do not, and oftentimes at the cost of persons of other racial groups. because this privilege is one that is systematically inferred rather than actively sought, it often remains invisible to those who benefit from it but its effects are experienced by those who are denied said privilege.

I didn't attach a prefix to the thread because I'm not sure I'm entirely familiar with the definition of PAX vs. PUG. I'd like this to be both a discussion with people chiming in, and a space of peaceful dialogue in good ol' NF style.

 

[Rferraris]

I'm curious what your thoughts are about racial privilege? for those of you who are familiar with the term "white privilege", do you agree with the idea?

Well I'm not sure if I understand the question. I am familiar with the term "white privilege." I grew up in fairly black neighborhoods. At the same time lived with my dad in very white neighborhoods. I feel privileged I grew up with the contrast.

I'm not sure how I feel about the ignorance. The ignorance of people that have the privilege and aren't aware of those that don't.

I think all people are prejudice. I've seen more than my fair share of reverse prejudice. A wrong doesn't make another right.

I think people trust what is familiar. I think people make assumptions and come to conclusions, and they may do it based on prejudice without knowing it.

I'm not sure if it's a term, but are you familiar with "black privilege"? That exists too. In fact I also grew up in a very Hispanic neighborhood as a young kid. Spoke Spanish or some dialect of it anyway pretty well. Have you heard of Hispanic Privilege? That exists.

I think people will afford the benefit of the doubt to what they understand.

I think what we should do us help each other understand.


Why do you think there is racial privilege?


To your question "do you agree with the idea?". I'm not sure what's to agree with. That it exists. Yeah it does. Do I agree that it's right/wrong? No more than another form used for segregation.

Do I think you should use it to justify an attitude, no. Do I think you should make people aware, yes. Do I think it's hurtful, yes. Not sure what the question is.

We all assume certain things about people, how their lives are, if they are clean, if they are educated, if they care about their families, kids, that they can get a job easily, have no problem getting what they want. I'm sure you would open your door to some people and not others, and you might do it cause a was a freaky looking white guy you didn't want in your house.

 

[This]

All races experience some form of superior treatment in one arena or another due to perceptions that we have in our minds. If your race gets treated very well in one arena it's a sure fire bet they are treated like shit in another. Being white has probably given me some advantage in the arena's I'm interested in, however it may have been a disadvantage had my interests been different. Had I wanted to be a martial arts guru not being asian would hurt my credibility, had I wanted to be a rap star not being black would hurt my credibility, had I wanted to be a computer tech I would probably lose out jobs to indians as it would be assumed they knew more about electronics by the ignorant. There are probably a lot more of these types of advantaged systems for whites, but there is discrimination everywhere both intentional and just ignorant regardless of race imo.

 

[Rferraris]

It's just hard to think of this without it going back to prejudice.

I often felt that people(black people) or parents of friends of mine acted like my family wasn't close and that we somehow didn't respect each other the way they did. That we didn't see each other through hard times. That there is a bond missing in our culture and that it's all based on things that don't mean much.
I never felt accepted by their parents. I hated that as a kid. I wanted so much to be like his other friends to the family, but they couldn't get passed it. The tone of the voice always changed when I was around. I think they thought they were being polite treating me that way. I was a fxxking kid and my family didn't raise me that way. You are color blind until some asshole shows you how.

 

[Soulful]

I'm curious how you guys/gals from the U.S. experience this as opposed to Canadian members or members from other regions. Being from Canada, there sometimes exists an unspoken sense that the two nations are quite similar in many regards, but the U.S. has a particularly unique history with regard to racial tension that Canada, in spite of its own issues, has not endured in the same ways and I'd wager to the same extent.

 

[Soulful]

[MENTION=5219]Rferraris[/MENTION] honestly I'm just wondering what people's thoughts/experiences/musings are. Nothing fancy, just dialogue.

 

[manatee]

white privilege is the idea that white persons experience (often invisible to them) privilege based on their skin colour

On two occasions, while taking the bus, ticket inspectors (is that the term?) have decided not to bother me, but diligently scrutinized whether or not the brown passengers had duly paid the fare. I suppose it's a somewhat frivolous example in the grand scheme of things, but they're the only events I can recall where such preferential treatment has been so conspicuous.


~~~~~

I've been thinking about how the topic applies to employment opportunities, though. I seem to remember a study where two job applications, one signed with a "native" and one with a "foreign" name but otherwise entirely equivalent, were sent out to a plethora of companies. Predictably, the native one was called in for significantly more interviews. Now, I don't consider discrimination on the employers' part without regard to the applicant's productivity to be a satisfactory explanation. Since the "foreigners" in such a situation would be in lower demand despite equal value for the enterprise, those hiring them would be able to out-compete discriminators, forcing wages to be bid up, which renders this scenario unstable. Other variables that might influence productivity and skew the data (eg education level) are obviously not present with this methodology.

The only remaining possibility to be seen is that the two hypothetical individuals, despite being each other's equal skill-wise, have different impacts on the staff's total productivity, thereby in reality turning out to not provide equal value for the employer. I venture the notion that this is caused by employees having racial biases, which cause them to be less efficient in certain ensembles.

(note: i'm aware that i made the non-obvious name-to-race connection, you can mentally exchange all instances of race for name in the argument and then postulate a correlation between name and race if you wish to be pedantic. and yeah, the term race is dubitable, i'm just using it as sort of a dysphemism for skin color.)

 

[Rferraris]

[MENTION=5219]Rferraris[/MENTION] honestly I'm just wondering what people's thoughts/experiences/musings are. Nothing fancy, just dialogue.

I think it's a good topic. It got me thinking It's a conversation I think that needs to take place. USA has a lot of hate, prejudice and negative racial history. I'm not sure what can be done. I seriously doubt much will happen in my life time. As the minorities become the majorities it will be an interesting dynamic. At least now you can point at white people. But when there aren't anymore left, who will be there to represent. Who will have the conversation. Who will accept responsibility.

 

[the]

As a white male what kind of privilege do I enjoy?

I suppose I do enjoy some kind of privilege, but it is probably something not financially profitable so I dont pay attention to it. Like I can go into a liquor store at midnight and not be suspected of robbing the place. Or I can walk down the street where I live and not have people stare and think "Gary is that way."

All things being equal I prefer people exactly like me anyways. Well then again I am a pretty shitty person haha.

 

[This]

On two occasions, while taking the bus, ticket inspectors (is that the term?) have decided not to bother me, but diligently scrutinized whether or not the brown passengers had duly paid the fare. I suppose it's a somewhat frivolous example in the grand scheme of things, but they're the only events I can recall where such preferential treatment has been so conspicuous.


~~~~~

I've been thinking about how the topic applies to employment opportunities, though. I seem to remember a study where two job applications, one signed with a "native" and one with a "foreign" name but otherwise entirely equivalent, were sent out to a plethora of companies. Predictably, the native one was called in for significantly more interviews. Now, I don't consider discrimination on the employers' part without regard to the applicant's productivity to be a satisfactory explanation. Since the "foreigners" in such a situation would be in lower demand despite equal value for the enterprise, those hiring them would be able to out-compete discriminators, forcing wages to be bid up, which renders this scenario unstable. Other variables that might influence productivity and skew the data (eg education level) are obviously not present with this methodology.

The only remaining possibility to be seen is that the two hypothetical individuals, despite being each other's equal skill-wise, have different impacts on the staff's total productivity, thereby in reality turning out to not provide equal value for the employer. I venture the notion that this is caused by employees having racial biases, which cause them to be less efficient in certain ensembles.

(note: i'm aware that i made the non-obvious name-to-race connection, you can mentally exchange all instances of race for name in the argument and then postulate a correlation between name and race if you wish to be pedantic. and yeah, the term race is dubitable, i'm just using it as sort of a dysphemism for skin color.)

That study is misleading for one very key reason, if you have to hire an applicant and you've got two guys to call up, but one of them you're not sure you can pronounce their name correctly, you'll probably go after the easier to pronounce one as a save to your own face not looking like an idiot on the phone, so it's probably just mostly lazy.

 

[Rferraris]

On two occasions, while taking the bus, ticket inspectors (is that the term?) have decided not to bother me, but diligently scrutinized whether or not the brown passengers had duly paid the fare. I suppose it's a somewhat frivolous example in the grand scheme of things, but they're the only events I can recall where such preferential treatment has been so conspicuous.


~~~~~

I've been thinking about how the topic applies to employment opportunities, though. I seem to remember a study where two job applications, one signed with a "native" and one with a "foreign" name but otherwise entirely equivalent, were sent out to a plethora of companies. Predictably, the native one was called in for significantly more interviews. Now, I don't consider discrimination on the employers' part without regard to the applicant's productivity to be a satisfactory explanation. Since the "foreigners" in such a situation would be in lower demand despite equal value for the enterprise, those hiring them would be able to out-compete discriminators, forcing wages to be bid up, which renders this scenario unstable. Other variables that might influence productivity and skew the data (eg education level) are obviously not present with this methodology.

The only remaining possibility to be seen is that the two hypothetical individuals, despite being each other's equal skill-wise, have different impacts on the staff's total productivity, thereby in reality turning out to not provide equal value for the employer. I venture the notion that this is caused by employees having racial biases, which cause them to be less efficient in certain ensembles.

(note: i'm aware that i made the non-obvious name-to-race connection, you can mentally exchange all instances of race for name in the argument and then postulate a correlation between name and race if you wish to be pedantic. and yeah, the term race is dubitable, i'm just using it as sort of a dysphemism for skin color.)

In the US we have affirmative action. I'm thinking you know this. But it's supposed to ameliorate the inequality in applications. Many feel it works I'm reverse and that it globally disqualifies in some cases tge must qualified. Sounds like you have a similar problem and racism is alive and well.

 

[Rferraris]

That study is misleading for one very key reason, if you have to hire an applicant and you've got two guys to call up, but one of them you're not sure you can pronounce their name correctly, you'll probably go after the easier to pronounce one as a save to your own face not looking like an idiot on the phone, so it's probably just mostly lazy.

Lol. You are strangely probably right.
Nothing to do with prejudice, hatred, or privilege. Just plain old lazy and embarrassed.

 

[This]

Lol. You are strangely probably right.
Nothing to do with prejudice, hatred, or privilege. Just plain old lazy and embarrassed.

I don't say that with absolute certainly mind you, lol. Just that their could be outliers. It very well could be racism. I just think studies like this are impossible to control enough for scientific analysis.

 

[endersgone]

As far as privileges are concerned... accrued generational wealth for one,

Perhaps it's not "exactly" a privelage per se, but it something that's often ignored...there are certainly disadvantages to having multi-generational debts, little-> no generational wealth. Upward social mobility is possible, but it's much more difficult to attain(for minorities). This can of course extend beyond minorities, but they are at a distinct disadvantage for accumulating said moneys... because a much larger portion of their population is busy paying money to previous generations... more so than the "white" population.

Problem is we treat most of these issues as non-issues, simply because we're now a "color-blind" nation... so to speak. In other words we see opportunity as equal across the board, but I don't think we're exactly there... yet.

 

[the]

[video=youtube;J3Xe1kX7Wsc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3Xe1kX7Wsc[/video]

Seems appropriate.

 

[manatee]

That study is misleading for one very key reason, if you have to hire an applicant and you've got two guys to call up, but one of them you're not sure you can pronounce their name correctly, you'll probably go after the easier to pronounce one as a save to your own face not looking like an idiot on the phone, so it's probably just mostly lazy.

Now, I don't consider discrimination on the employers' part without regard to the applicant's productivity to be a satisfactory
explanation. Since the "foreigners" in such a situation would be in lower demand despite equal value for the enterprise, those hiring
them would be able to out-compete discriminators, forcing wages to be bid up, which renders this scenario unstable.​

Hmm, let's see if we can fix this. Let's call the unwillingness to attempt to pronounce the foreign name xenologophobia.

Now, I don't consider xenologophobia on the employers' part without regard to the applicant's productivity to be a satisfactory
explanation. Since the "foreigners" in such a situation would be in lower demand despite equal value for the enterprise, those willing
to attempt pronunciation would be able to out-compete discriminators, forcing wages to be bid up, which renders this scenario unstable.​

Huh, that was quick. Point being, systematical hiring decisions based on anything other than productivity is untenable since it leads to higher costs.

In the US we have affirmative action. I'm thinking you know this. But it's supposed to ameliorate the inequality in applications. Many feel it works I'm reverse and that it globally disqualifies in some cases tge must qualified. Sounds like you have a similar problem and racism is alive and well.

I didn't know that. Do you know specifically how it's constructed? I know some types of legislation like that can have unintended consequences in that employers categorically avoid any association with prospective employees that may file a lawsuit against them (eg women not being employed due to regulations that require companies to provide paid leave for pregnancy). Measuring the actual outcome clearly borders on the impossible, though.

(I don't understand the emboldened part)

There is a worrying development where I live. In most places, the older generations seem relatively more xenophobic than the younger ones, but here it seems to be the reverse. Yup, alive and thriving.

 

[Rferraris]

I didn't know that. Do you know specifically how it's constructed? I know some types of legislation like that can have unintended consequences in that employers categorically avoid any association with prospective employees that may file a lawsuit against them (eg women not being employed due to regulations that require companies to provide paid leave for pregnancy). Measuring the actual outcome clearly borders on the impossible, though.

(I don't understand the emboldened part)

There is a worrying development where I live. In most places, the older generations seem relatively more xenophobic than the younger ones, but here it seems to be the reverse. Yup, alive and thriving.

Sorry for all the typing errors.

I think the program works like this.
The application asks you questions, which are voluntary. But on a percentage basis, a college or job opportunity must demonstrate acceptance of minorities to comply with the law. If someone were to challenge the institution, I guess, and they weren't in compliance, they would be liable and maybe lose a lawsuit of some sort.

I have heard about the most qualified students being denied acceptance to top schools because there are only so many seats and they have to accept so many applicants from various backgrounds and minorities. I am pretty sure this program was put in place a long time ago when outward racism was prevalent and no effort was taken to disguise or hide it. Sounds like it had its place but not sure how appropriate it is today. Being white and male I am privileged and maybe unaware of the consequences. I don't experience them.
But I'm under the impression there is a zero tolerance for racism and profiling.
I'm sure I'm wrong and there are cases of it, but I am suspect it's more the exception than the rule. And so I think the law is inappropriate, but politically who would be on record for getting rid of something that protects minorities. So the disadvantage are the advantaged and they become the privileged.

 

[bamf]

I very firmly believe that racial privilege exists, and does so due to cultural capital.

[MENTION=3255]Sali[/MENTION], some interesting research has been done by Linguistics who will call job agencies or housing agencies and use a variety of different dialects and "races" to try and secure a job/housing. Linguistic Profiling is alive and well in many areas, and it's really interesting to read about. I wish I could remember the name of the first study I read about. It's kinda hard to find because it's a relatively new field of research.

 

[#@&5&49]

This might be a little out of context, but ability privilege definitely exists. "Abled" people have many more privileges than people with disabilities and many "abled" people are not aware of this, but most people with disabilities are very aware of it.

 

[Kanamori]

It is definitely still alive in the US.It comes to whether you want to call it prejudice or privilege though. There are many privileges that whites enjoy, not necessarily because they are white, but based on occupation, wealth, etc.(When was the last time someone who defrauded or knowingly lied about health/safety (and as a result got many people killed) was treated roughly by police? How about someone who steals very little by comparison shop lifting or such?

Crime Stats
Racial profiling not structurally related, i.e. not based on where you live, so excluding differences between people from low income areas (usually predominantly minorities), doesn't explain all of the criminal enforcement differences between races.

African americans accounted for 16.9% of the drug using population, while they represented 37.3% of people who were arrested related to drugs -- Whites were 82% of the drug using population while they were 61.5% of the population arrested for drugs... in 1998 anyway, but is one of the statistics probably at least partially related to demographics(http://www.hrw.org/reports/2000/usa/Table1718.pdf)

lacks and other minorities have been disproportionately targeted in "stop and frisk" operations in which police temporarily detain,question, and pat down pedestrians suspected of criminal activity. In New York City, for example, between January 1998 and March 1999,police officers made far more stop and frisks in minority neighborhoods; even within neighborhoods with primarily white populations, the majority of the people stopped were black or Hispanic

Similarly skilled african americans make less money within occupations than whites, and the racial inequality in wages, unrelated to skill/qualifications, increases in higher income occupations.
(http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/cde/cdewp/99-28.pdf)(pretty old stats though, 1987)

There's a lot more out there.