The similarity between Calvinism and leftism

[Headkicktoleg]

90% of "white privilege " is just having a dad present. Cops definitely need a reform, but so does the AA community. A lot of black kids grow up being taught their lives suck and will always suck and none of it is their fault, it's the Mans fault. What would you do if nothing mattered. Have sex with as many women as possible, do and sell drugs. All the money you do make you waste on frivolous shit.

 

[Deleted member 159002]

Commentators quickly jump in to remind us that “not all white people are privileged,” a clear (and perhaps willful) misreading of the term. Obviously not all white people are wealthy, and yes, there are minorities who have achieved wealth and other marks of status. But white privilege is something specific and different – it’s the idea that just by virtue of being a white person of any kind, you’re part of the dominant group which tends to be respected, assumed the best of, and given the benefit of the doubt.

Before everyone gets too defensive (and let’s be honest — it’s probably too late), a few notes of clarification: Pointing out that white privilege exists isn’t the same as accusing every white person of being a racist. Acknowledging that you might benefit from such privilege isn’t equivalent to self-hatred or kowtowing to detested “social justice warriors.”

The thing about white privilege is that it tends to be unintentional, unconscious, uncomfortable to recognize but easy to take for granted. But it’s that very invisibility that makes it that much more important to understand: Without confronting what exists, there’s no chance of leveling the field.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2016/01/16/white-privilege-explained/

Sounds an awful lot like total depravity.

 

[PrinceOfPain]

Awesome, you understand what it means then.

As I said in a previous post, I don't like the wordage. Using a positive word about another race in order to describe the negative situations of another race makes little sense, and as we can see by how so many people take and misunderstand the term, it is unnecessarily divisive. It also makes it seem like there is some fault or blame, when it isn't what it means. I understand why people don't like the term---I don't like it. But it doesn't mean what so many people often misinterpret it to mean.


And no, you misunderstand my point. There is nothing racist about the term. Just like there is nothing inherently sexist about many examples of male or female privilege.
They are not based on purely biological differences, they are based on cultural and social differences.
Why is it more socially acceptable for a man to fart and burp in public compared to a woman? Why are women less likely to be suspected of crimes?
That isn't biology or genetics, it is social and cultural.

The "privilege" that whites have is social, cultural, and historical, not genetic. Just like there would be Han privilege in China. Call it "Homeland" privilege" if that makes you feel better, but the idea is the same, and it exists to different degrees no matter where you are.

lol Blame your ancestors if this shit triggers you. You hear it more for white people, because white people conquered and colonized a lot of the world.

It's so often misinterpreted because it is an inaccurate and, I would guess, an intentionally divisive term. It is counterproductive to the stated intentions of those who most readily toss it around, making their motives seem very suspect. Not to mentioned that it is as frequently misinterpreted by those who advocate its use as it is by those opposed to its use.
It's a shitty, shitty term and I tend to view its use as inciting speech because through it's inaccuracy and racial bias, the term itself has a racial scapegoat built right into it. It's more akin to Hitler's "Jewish question" or my own country's "Swart Gevaar" (black danger) than anything I've seen from America's mainstream right. Though it's even more insidious, because people using it perpetuate racism while claiming to want to defeat it.
Grim stuff.

I don't think I do misunderstand your point; I think you've not thought your point through very well.
Privileges possessed by men and women are, more often than not, based on sexism by virtue of the fact that they are based on biological traits we assume (both correctly and otherwise) to be inherent to biological sex. Because the differences between men and woman are so stark compared to the differences between black and white, for example, that you'd even make the comparison strikes me as ill-thought-through; it either denies biological sex differences (and the fact that those differences might have impacted culture/society) or it propagates the idea of stark biological racial differences.
I wouldn't call either a male or female "privilege", but whatever you call them, they are behaviours that we have adopted to what we assume are unchangeable biological facts (women can fall pregnant, men can't; men tend to be larger, stronger and more physically aggressive than women).

As to your questions:
A) Why is it more acceptable for men to be disgusting? Probably has something to do with the fact that women are more prone to a 'disgust' response than men are, and are more forgiving of said response when sexually aroused, so, for sound evolutionary reasons, men get away with being grosser. Simply put, hygiene is biologically prioritised in the female of the species as compared to the male - that's reflected, to various degrees, in the behaviour and expectations of most human societies that have had the luxury to consider it at all.
B) Why are women less likely to be suspected of crimes? Could you source this, segmenting by the types of crimes for which they are less likely to be suspected? Pretty sure most of the time it could be summed up with assumptions about women's natural predispositions when compared to those about men's. Ie, "Woman don't like math" or "woman are smaller/weaker than men."

In some cases, men and women are different in biological ways that society does not dictate. And in others still, our treatment of one another is based on ways in which we simply assume we are biologically different.
To cut-and-paste the premise underlying the respective day-to-day treatment of the sexes onto the respective treatment of people of different colours, is to imply unchangeable differences between people of different colours.
To fight "white privilege", rather than accurately identifying and naming the problem, is to plan to fight a war you have no intention of winning/ending. You've tied being privileged to being white. Whatever my personal circumstances, I cannot change being white and therefore I cannot change the perception of privilege that the term associates with being white.
And, to be honest, it actually wouldn't matter even if your own personal definition of the term weren't racist. Hardly any utterance of the term comes with an honest or informed discussion about what it constitutes, and so we are left only with the term itself. And, taken at face value, it's a racist term.

To your last point, I am not going to blame my ancestors. I'm going to blame the people who insist on continuing the clearly flawed narrative started by the rulers of those ancestors. My ancestors had less information to work with than you do, they lived in a less tolerant society, and they had far less personal power, so they can be forgiven for following stupid paths. YOU know how dangerous a race-based narrative can be. YOU have the advantage of having a longer view of history, AND you have the accumulated knowledge of mankind at your fingertips, and yet you continue to drive the same story that backwards peasants from 300 years ago did.

 

[MichiganMMA1978]

Is that what I said? Let's check.




Nope. You are just a bad faith piece of shit. Get fucked.

Slow down there dickhead. You had that in a whole different post than the one I replied to. So fuck you and your backtracking. No faith p.o.s. fuck yourself

Edit: nice dubs bitch

 

[7437]

Slow down there dickhead. You had that in a whole different post than the one I replied to. So fuck you and your backtracking. No faith p.o.s. fuck yourself

Edit: nice dubs bitch

Its literally 2 posts down. Your literacy is stunning.

 

[MichiganMMA1978]

Its literally 2 posts down. Your literacy is stunning.

Why would I read the whole thread before replying to a comment I don't agree with? Why did only reply to half his post? Why did you not include that bit of information in the reply, instead put it in 2 posts down in a different reply. I'm not here to play detective. It's on you how your words come out

 

[7437]

Why would I read the whole thread before replying to a comment I don't agree with? Why did only reply to half his post? Why did you not include that bit of information in the reply, instead put it in 2 posts down in a different reply. I'm not here to play detective. It's on you how your words come out

 

[MichiganMMA1978]

Oooohhhh... Sik burn bro

 

[Gunny]

We should probably draw a distinction between left wingers who think of white privilege as a loose generalization and those who view it as an essential attribute of whiteness. The former can kinda be rationalized. The latter is pure drooling idiocy. Should note that many so called reasonable left wingers who claim the former will quickly retreat to the latter when confronted with examples of disadvantaged whites.

We should also acknowledge that loose generalization can be made about black privilege. For no other group are there so many people who want to see you do well and will put their thumb on the scale in your favor (often in ways you may not even perceive).

And we certainly can’t finish this discourse without mentioning the all powerful “pussy privilege”. There is nothing happening in any race that compares to the benefits and advantages of being an attractive female. Full stop.

 

[IndyCovaHart]

I heard recently that white privilege is when you wash BLM graffiti off of your property.

 

[ithinktheymad]

in general, it seems to have more to do with being a part of the demographic predominantly responsible for building the society in question.

You mean like the demographic that labored for free in the most profitable industries(sugar, tobacco, cotton, rice, rubber, and so on) that allowed that country to achieve economic dominance then not allowed full participation in that economy not only by exclusion but by having wealth siphoned from them? I guess them building half of the railroad system and constructing roads while in the chain gang doesn't count for building anything either right?

90% of "white privilege " is just having a dad present. Cops definitely need a reform, but so does the AA community. A lot of black kids grow up being taught their lives suck and will always suck and none of it is their fault, it's the Mans fault. What would you do if nothing mattered. Have sex with as many women as possible, do and sell drugs. All the money you do make you waste on frivolous shit.

Everyone likes to get high and fuck. Maybe if the justice system wasn't so broken less black men would be incarcerated and home with their families. Also, black women make up 52% of that population.

While there are racial differences in violent and property crime rates, the picture is quite different for drug crimes, which account for one-quarter of state prison admissions and almost one-third of federal prison admissions.95) Whites comprise the majority of drug users and sellers,96) but were only 30% of the state prison population with drug convictions in 2011.97) Surveys by the National Institute on Drug Abuse and the Department of Health and Human Services show that both recently98) and historically,99) whites, blacks, and Hispanics have used illicit drugs at roughly similar rates, with whites sometimes outpacing people of color. Research also suggests that drug users generally purchase drugs from people of the same race or ethnicity.100) Thus if drug law violations were equally enforced, prosecuted, and sentenced, the racial profile of drug offenders in the prison population would match that of the general population. But police policies and practices, prosecutorial charging discretion, and sentencing laws have created a schism between who participates in the illicit drug market and who is punished for it. Criminologist Alfred Blumstein has estimated the degree to which racial differences in crime rates account for the disproportionate presence of African Americans in prisons.

https://www.sentencingproject.org/p...s-of-crime-and-support-for-punitive-policies/

 

[MicroBrew]

It's a stupid, stupid, stupid term. There is nothing encapsulated by "white privilege" that we don't see a more extreme version of in, say, China where it would be labelled "Han privilege". It is not something that comes from being white - in general, it seems to have more to do with being a part of the demographic predominantly responsible for building the society in question.

The fact that so-called "white privilege" is readily compared to female/male "privilege" not only proves the idiocy of the claims of "white privilege" but it proves the racism of its advocates. The "privileges" you speak about men and women having are predominantly based on biological differences between the two. Your implication, therefore, is that white privilege is based on a genetic advantage that whites have over non-whites.
Which, as you may or may not know, is pure racism.

Re. bolded
You are deliberatlet misrepresenting his argument. It is clear from the term "White priviledge" and his posts that he was referring to the reality that a White person in America is just viewed differently than a Black person and in many instances will be treated different just because of the phenotypic difference. He was not - and the term itself - does not refer to racial superiority on the biological level.

 

[SmilinDesperado]

It's so often misinterpreted because it is an inaccurate and, I would guess, an intentionally divisive term. It is counterproductive to the stated intentions of those who most readily toss it around, making their motives seem very suspect. Not to mentioned that it is as frequently misinterpreted by those who advocate its use as it is by those opposed to its use.
It's a shitty, shitty term and I tend to view its use as inciting speech because through it's inaccuracy and racial bias, the term itself has a racial scapegoat built right into it. It's more akin to Hitler's "Jewish question" or my own country's "Swart Gevaar" (black danger) than anything I've seen from America's mainstream right. Though it's even more insidious, because people using it perpetuate racism while claiming to want to defeat it.
Grim stuff.

I don't think I do misunderstand your point; I think you've not thought your point through very well.
Privileges possessed by men and women are, more often than not, based on sexism by virtue of the fact that they are based on biological traits we assume (both correctly and otherwise) to be inherent to biological sex. Because the differences between men and woman are so stark compared to the differences between black and white, for example, that you'd even make the comparison strikes me as ill-thought-through; it either denies biological sex differences (and the fact that those differences might have impacted culture/society) or it propagates the idea of stark biological racial differences.
I wouldn't call either a male or female "privilege", but whatever you call them, they are behaviours that we have adopted to what we assume are unchangeable biological facts (women can fall pregnant, men can't; men tend to be larger, stronger and more physically aggressive than women).

As to your questions:
A) Why is it more acceptable for men to be disgusting? Probably has something to do with the fact that women are more prone to a 'disgust' response than men are, and are more forgiving of said response when sexually aroused, so, for sound evolutionary reasons, men get away with being grosser. Simply put, hygiene is biologically prioritised in the female of the species as compared to the male - that's reflected, to various degrees, in the behaviour and expectations of most human societies that have had the luxury to consider it at all.
B) Why are women less likely to be suspected of crimes? Could you source this, segmenting by the types of crimes for which they are less likely to be suspected? Pretty sure most of the time it could be summed up with assumptions about women's natural predispositions when compared to those about men's. Ie, "Woman don't like math" or "woman are smaller/weaker than men."

In some cases, men and women are different in biological ways that society does not dictate. And in others still, our treatment of one another is based on ways in which we simply assume we are biologically different.
To cut-and-paste the premise underlying the respective day-to-day treatment of the sexes onto the respective treatment of people of different colours, is to imply unchangeable differences between people of different colours.
To fight "white privilege", rather than accurately identifying and naming the problem, is to plan to fight a war you have no intention of winning/ending. You've tied being privileged to being white. Whatever my personal circumstances, I cannot change being white and therefore I cannot change the perception of privilege that the term associates with being white.
And, to be honest, it actually wouldn't matter even if your own personal definition of the term weren't racist. Hardly any utterance of the term comes with an honest or informed discussion about what it constitutes, and so we are left only with the term itself. And, taken at face value, it's a racist term.

To your last point, I am not going to blame my ancestors. I'm going to blame the people who insist on continuing the clearly flawed narrative started by the rulers of those ancestors. My ancestors had less information to work with than you do, they lived in a less tolerant society, and they had far less personal power, so they can be forgiven for following stupid paths. YOU know how dangerous a race-based narrative can be. YOU have the advantage of having a longer view of history, AND you have the accumulated knowledge of mankind at your fingertips, and yet you continue to drive the same story that backwards peasants from 300 years ago did.

There is actually little disagreement on the shittiness of the word itself.
I think words like that and statements like "black people can't be racist" have done more harm to the cause than anything. And there are most definitely people on both sides that throw out these terms with no real understanding of what they mean.
I don't think that they were intentionally divisive, or intentionally insulting. The idea of privilege was first explored with male privilege from feminists, so it wasn't just thought up for white people.
I think it is just an academic term that some professor started to say on a CNN panel or something, and it caught on in recent years.

You went way into detail on some simple points that I was trying to make. I wasn't earnestly asking you why it is socially acceptable for men to fart, and not women. I thought the general point would be understood.
Yes, some of the ways that we form our ideas and culture are based on biology, and others are based on experience and interaction, and a ton of other factors that create culture. And culture grows and changes.

What is acceptable or frowned upon between women and men in one culture can be different from another. And that can go with races as well. People form their ideas on races by stories they hear, experiences they've had, stereotypes, etc.
We aren't going to agree on this, but I just responded so that you didn't write all of that out for nothing.
Cheers.

 

[Hadron90]

We can disagree on how big or small of an effect it actually has, but on whether or not it exists?
If you are offended by the term it is because you don't understand it. Admittedly, it is a terribly worded term that hasn't done much good in trying to explain what it is trying to explain.

Let me ask you this, Is there no such thing as female privilege? Or male privilege? Do men and women not have some natural privileges and advantages over each other that they get for the sole reason of them being men and women?
Can a woman talk shit and throw a drink on a guy with relatively little fear of getting her ass kicked? Can a man do the same?
Can a man walk down a street at night in his boxers without fear of getting raped? Can a woman?

Having those natural advantages doesn't mean that every person in that group is living a problem free life and sipping on Moet while they get their toes sucked by LA 10s. It is just an acknowledgement that the playing field isn't entirely even.
It has nothing to do with thinking that the other is "depraved" or evil. It is not a demonization of men, women, or white people.

No, there is no such thing as female or male privilege.

 

[PrinceOfPain]

You mean like the demographic that labored for free in the most profitable industries(sugar, tobacco, cotton, rice, rubber, and so on) that allowed that country to achieve economic dominance then not allowed full participation in that economy not only by exclusion but by having wealth siphoned from them? I guess them building half of the railroad system and constructing roads while in the chain gang doesn't count for building anything either right?

Were slaves autonomous? It's hard to see how you could credit slaves with building America, when you can't even give modern black Americans responsibility for the states of their communities.

Re. bolded
You are deliberatlet misrepresenting his argument. It is clear from the term "White priviledge" and his posts that he was referring to the reality that a White person in America is just viewed differently than a Black person and in many instances will be treated different just because of the phenotypic difference. He was not - and the term itself - does not refer to racial superiority on the biological level.

No, I am accurately representing the term.

His comparing "white privilege" to "female privilege" just made it easier for me to do so.
It is a term that ties an unalterable characteristic to alterable circumstances. It's dangerous.

 

[Ruprecht]

The influence of Calvinism in the US is more notable in the idea that poverty is a moral failure. Justification by wealth.

 

[Seso]

Yes white leftists showed us in the last few days how crazy and brainwashed they're

 

[Hadron90]

Re. bolded
You are deliberatlet misrepresenting his argument. It is clear from the term "White priviledge" and his posts that he was referring to the reality that a White person in America is just viewed differently than a Black person and in many instances will be treated different just because of the phenotypic difference. He was not - and the term itself - does not refer to racial superiority on the biological level.

There is no way you can reduce all of the complexities of how you will be viewed over your life down to your skin color.

 

[PrinceOfPain]

There is actually little disagreement on the shittiness of the word itself.
I think words like that and statements like "black people can't be racist" have done more harm to the cause than anything. And there are most definitely people on both sides that throw out these terms with no real understanding of what they mean.
I don't think that they were intentionally divisive, or intentionally insulting. The idea of privilege was first explored with male privilege from feminists, so it wasn't just thought up for white people.
I think it is just an academic term that some professor started to say on a CNN panel or something, and it caught on in recent years.

You went way into detail on some simple points that I was trying to make. I wasn't earnestly asking you why it is socially acceptable for men to fart, and not women. I thought the general point would be understood.
Yes, some of the ways that we form our ideas and culture are based on biology, and others are based on experience and interaction, and a ton of other factors that create culture. And culture grows and changes.

What is acceptable or frowned upon between women and men in one culture can be different from another. And that can go with races as well. People form their ideas on races by stories they hear, experiences they've had, stereotypes, etc.
We aren't going to agree on this, but I just responded so that you didn't write all of that out for nothing.
Cheers.

I work in communication (I develop marketing and advertising strategies) and I have always had a chip on my shoulder when it comes to language use - not just in terms of what the communicator means, but more importantly, what the audience hears.
To be honest, I don't even like the term "feminist" because it automatically divides people into camps, based on something outside of their control, before any conversation can even start to take place. The reason I went into detail on your examples is because I wanted to highlight one major distinction between discussions of sex-equality and discussions of race-equality. I understood the gist you were trying to communicate, but the examples you used illustrated that you did not.
Equating the two is dangerous. Your examples, for instance, are not what I would call examples of privilege because they are based on real-life, factual differences in capabilities between the sexes - they come with drawbacks. No such stark differences exist between black, white or brown.

Distinctions between men and women can be divided into (A) biological reality; or (B) social construct (which may be informed/necessitated by biological reality, and may be temporary).
Distinctions between black and white are almost exclusively social and based in circumstance. As far as I can tell, they are not at all informed by biological reality, and so they should be temporary.

Point to specifics. For example, as a result of racist policies no longer actively in enforcement, do the railways still not pass through nearby certain poor predominantly black areas, making it harder for them to aspire beyond their circumstances? Push for expanded public transport into economically struggling districts - don't tell me "whites get trains".

Anyway, I don't think we disagree that strongly. I just go through phases of verbosity.

 

[flashNsmash]

the swiss did this!