.

[H10]

I think it is well established that family wealth confers advantages on individuals. This is the nature of the universe and it will never change. The trouble are people who argue that because some people with certain skin pigmentation benefit from family wealth that all people who share that same pigmentation also benefit. The latter assertion is absurd.

White privilege is not simply a question of wealth, it is positive privileges that even poor whites benefit from.

White privilege (or white skin privilege) is a term for societal privileges that benefit white people in Western countries beyond what is commonly experienced by non-white people under the same social, political, or economic circumstances.^{[note 1]} According to McIntosh and Lee, whites in a society considered culturally a part of the Western world enjoy advantages that non-whites do not experience.^[1] The term denotes both obvious and less obvious passive advantages that white persons may not recognize they have, which distinguishes it from overt bias or prejudice.^[2] These include cultural affirmations of one's own worth; presumed greater social status; and freedom to move, buy, work, play, and speak freely.^[1] The effects can be seen in professional, educational, and personal contexts.^[3] The concept of white privilege also implies the right to assume the universality of one's own experiences, marking others as different or exceptional while perceiving oneself as normal.^[4][5]

Academic perspectives such as critical race theory and whiteness studies use the concept of "white privilege" to analyze how racism and racialized societies affect the lives of white people.

[H10]

The people who use that term intend it as a way to denigrate people who do not share their preferred skin tone. They also use it as an excuse to avoid addressing the complex problems that result in certain minorities getting trapped in cycles of poverty by blaming the problems on outside forces and ignoring the role that personal choices play.

Nope, not about dealbinating anyone. It was whites who invented the term

[H10]

Just because some people believe in the flying spaghetti monster, does not mean that it is real. Also, religious 'experts' generally believe in a deity. Does that mean I should also believe in a deity since experts do?

---SNIP---

We aren't talking about religion.

Your study confirms white privilege.

"Combining all three cities, resumes with English-sounding names are 35 percent more likely to receive callbacks than resumes with Indian or Chinese names, remarkably consistent with earlier findings from Oreopoulos (2009) for Toronto in better economic circumstances."

Table 14 says foreign name engineers get called back less.

You cannot dismiss this point by dismissing other experts, you need to dismiss THESE experts as wrong and prove it, and all the evidence says white privilege exist. its like trying to disprove gravity.

Yes male privilege exist. I've seen it only after it was pointed out to me. There are indeed certain advantages and privileges conferred just for being male.

Edited November 23, 2015 by H10
[---SNIP---]

[H10]

Yes, because universities are infected by this social justice religion.

---SNIP---

You are creating strawmen about religion. This isn't about religion. It can't be proven false because it is true. Look at how whites say bandaids as skin tone are really WHITE skin tone. Whites create thing for white culture, they pretend they are neutral. Perhaps the biggest proof of white privilege at all, is the ability for whites to deny it. They can pretend it doesn't exist while it crushed the other races under the jack boot foot of oppression.

Edited November 23, 2015 by H10
[---SNIP---]

[TimG]

You are dancing away from the facts that the vast majority of the experts say white privilege is real and occurs.

Appeals to authority mean nothing: especially in the social sciences where many researchers are ideologues with preexisting opinions that they want to flog.

More importantly, I have explained why I think the methodology used by these so called experts cannot be used to support the claims they want to make. So basically, if all you got is an 'appeal to authority' then you have no rational basis for your claim that 'white privilege exists'.

Edited November 23, 2015 by TimG

[TimG]

You are creating strawmen about religion. This isn't about religion. It can't be proven false because it is true.

You sound just like a creationist insisting that their "facts" conclusively show the earth is only 6000 years old. The "facts" that you claim do not exist. What you have are OPINIONS supported by mining data to find spurious correlations that support the opinion while ignoring correlations that contradict it. You have nothing more. Opinions are not facts. Learn the difference. Edited November 23, 2015 by TimG

[TimG]

Perhaps the biggest proof of white privilege at all, is the ability for whites to deny it. They can pretend it doesn't exist while it crushed the other races under the jack boot foot of oppression.

This statement clearly illustrates how you are peddling non-scientific BS (e.g. a religion). A corner stone of the scientific method is the ability to 'falsify a hypothesis' (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability). i.e. there must be a way to be prove the hypothesis false. If there is no way to prove the hypothesis false then you do not have a scientific hypothesis - you have an opinion. Edited November 23, 2015 by TimG

[-1=e^ipi]

besides a poor white man can become a rich white man with the flick of a wand.

Really? We have magic powers? I had no idea. Guess I need to go to Hogwarts to learn how to do magic.

whites enjoy advantages that non-whites do not experience.

And non-whites enjoy advantages that whites do not experience. For example, advantage when it comes to job applications, more university scholarships, and not being harassed about your 'white privilege'. Not to mention the worst academic performance after controlling for poverty (http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/34667100/poor-white-boys-get-a-worse-start-in-life-says-equality-report) because the school systems are convinced that all these poor white people are privileged, so do not need help.

These include cultural affirmations of one's own worth

Really? I keep getting told that white males are the cause of all the problems of the world.

and speak freely.

Yes, that's why there are all these moves to curtail freedom of speech in Canada. From human rights tribunals trying to ban publishing cartoons of Mohamed, to anti-free speech 'microaggression' policy, to men's rights groups being silenced on universities, to Gregory Elliot being put on trial for disagreeing with feminists and not wanting to take part in their cyberbulling campaign.

The concept of white privilege also implies the right to assume the universality of one's own experiences

Yeah, which is stupid. You can't tell someone's level of privilege just by looking at someone's race and sex. But the 'progressive' SJWs want an excuse to be sexist racists that can judge people based upon appearance.

Edited November 23, 2015 by -1=e^ipi

[-1=e^ipi]

We aren't talking about religion.

I was demonstrating how authority figures are not necessarily right. So appeals to authority are bad arguments. Look at this man in authority with a funny hat. He must be right about the universe because he is an 'expert' that has dedicated his life to understanding it!:

Your study confirms white privilege.

It doesn't 'confirm' white privilege. It shows evidence of a bias against foreign sounding names. And there are cases where having a foreign sounding name is a benefit (example: Chinese sounding name when applying to engineering jobs). The point is things aren't universal, they are far more nuanced than that.

It also shows that there is an advantage to having a female sounding name over a male sounding name that is larger than the effect of having a non-foreign sounding name vs a foreign sounding name. Yet all these 'experts' you keep referring to also believe in 'male privilege'.

Yes male privilege exist.

Oh wow, you really are a member of the church of social justice.

Look, if you look at a lot of the evidence that is used to suggest that blacks are on average disadvantaged relative to whites, such as lower life expectancy, higher rate of homelessness, being charged for longer sentences for the same crimes, higher rate of being murdered or assaulted, etc. all of those show that men are disadvantaged relative to women. The effect of being male vs female when it comes to criminal sentencing is 6 times the effect of being black vs white!

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2144002

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1985377

If being male is so much better than being female, then why do men commit suicide at 3.5 times the rate of women and why to transwomen outnumber transmen by a similar ratio? Why do women consistently have higher self reported happiness?

Women have a higher life expectancy.

Men are twice as likely to be the victim of a violent crime (physical assault, murder, etc.).

Men are more likely to have their genitals mutilated against their consent and infant male genital mutilation is culturally accepted.

Men have historically been sent to go die in wars, often against their wills (example: world war 1) and some developed countries, like the USA, have a male-only draft.

Boys are performing worse in schools and women make up over 60% of university students.

Men are disadvantaged when it comes to child custody.

Male rape victims aren't taken as seriously as female rape victims. The US government refuses to even recognize forced penetration as rape.

Etc.

I could go on but I suggest you go to one of the men's rights threads.

Edited November 23, 2015 by Michael Hardner
image

[H10]

Appeals to authority mean nothing: especially in the social sciences where many researchers are ideologues with preexisting opinions that they want to flog.

More importantly, I have explained why I think the methodology used by these so called experts cannot be used to support the claims they want to make. So basically, if all you got is an 'appeal to authority' then you have no rational basis for your claim that 'white privilege exists'.

Nope, it is just factually true, its not the appeal to authority, it is appeal to the factual information that the authroitys use. You haven't addressed that. You just call them bias, but it doesn't matter, it doesn't change the facts

[H10]

You sound just like a creationist insisting that their "facts" conclusively show the earth is only 6000 years old. The "facts" that you claim do not exist. What you have are OPINIONS supported by mining data to find spurious correlations that support the opinion while ignoring correlations that contradict it. You have nothing more. Opinions are not facts. Learn the difference.

These are studies supported by data. You need to prove the studies wrong, you can't just whine about bias. You sound like a flat earther.

This statement clearly illustrates how you are peddling non-scientific BS (e.g. a religion). A corner stone of the scientific method is the ability to 'falsify a hypothesis' (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability). i.e. there must be a way to be prove the hypothesis false. If there is no way to prove the hypothesis false then you do not have a scientific hypothesis - you have an opinion.

You are peddling a religion, I am showing facts and evidence.

[H10]

I was demonstrating how authority figures are not necessarily right. So appeals to authority are bad arguments. Look at this man in authority with a funny hat. He must be right about the universe because he is an 'expert' that has dedicated his life to understanding it!:

---SNIP---

You have made an appeal to authority error. Not me, I quoted people who have expertise from a broad brush of academia. You quoted some street psycho. Besides they use facts and studies. You haven't disproved the studies, you can't they are facts. The study didn't support your chinese name engineering benefit. I couldn't find it anywhere in there. I found the opposite.

You are mixing unfortunate circumstances with privilege. men engage in more risky behaviours due to biology. Men are more likely to be seen as threats by other men. This is mainly men doing this to each other not an outside group like women.

That being the case there is still male privilege and white privilege and white male privilege is the most privilege group of all.

Edited November 25, 2015 by H10
excessive quoting [---SNIP---]

[H10]

Really? We have magic powers? I had no idea. Guess I need to go to Hogwarts to learn how to do magic.

---SNIP---

LOL, yeah not being able to discriminate against minorities is such a heavy burden how will I ever survive. Why are white men trying to insult other people's prophets. See that is the white privilege, you feel you should be able to insult other groups but go nuts if other groups insult you.

Yes because white privilege is created for white males.

Edited November 25, 2015 by H10
[---SNIP---]

[TimG]

Nope, it is just factually true, its not the appeal to authority, it is appeal to the factual information that the authroitys use. You haven't addressed that.

You need to learn the distinction between facts and opinion. A fact is a statistic like "X percent of black families have a single parent." An opinion is any narrative used to explain the facts. "White Privilege" is not a fact - it is an opinion put forth by researchers with an agenda as a way to explain the actual facts. Claiming that I cannot question the opinion of your favoured researchers is nothing but an appeal to authority.

These are studies supported by data. You need to prove the studies wrong, you can't just whine about bias.

The onus is not on me to prove the opposite. All I need to do is explain why I think the methodology used cannot be use to draw the conclusions claimed. In this case, starting with a pre-determined narrative and then cherry picking data to support that narrative is a bad methodology.

You are peddling a religion, I am showing facts and evidence.

You have provided NO evidence. All you do is offer your opinion and arrogantly presume to call your opinion a "fact". When people call you on your BS you claim that the very act of challenging you is more evidence that your opinion must be correct. It is completely delusional thinking on your part. Edited November 24, 2015 by TimG

[Guest]

LOL, yeah not being able to discriminate against minorities is such a heavy burden how will I ever survive. Why are white men trying to insult other people's prophets. See that is the white privilege, you feel you should be able to insult other groups but go nuts if other groups insult you.

Yes because white privilege is created for white males.

What on Earth is wrong with insulting someone else's prophet?

[-1=e^ipi]

I couldn't find it anywhere in there. I found the opposite.

Maybe it was a different study. I don't have time to check right now. I know that Oreopolous has found a Chinese-sounding name advantage when it comes of engineering jobs; that was one of the exceptions he found to the foreign name bias result. As for 'finding the opposite', I don't think you understand the concept of nuance. Things are more complicated than group X is always disadvantaged over group Y in all circumstances. I never claimed that a foreign name bias doesn't exist, my claim was that there are exceptions.

men engage in more risky behaviours due to biology.

Or social conditioning, which constantly tells men not to value themselves as much as women, which means they are less likely to take precautions to protect themselves and more likely to take risks to obtain value. Go see my thread on reproductive utility.

Men are more likely to be seen as threats by other men. This is mainly men doing this to each other not an outside group like women.

Both men and women have agency. The tendency to put all agency on men is sexist and traditionalist.

That being the case there is still male privilege and white privilege and white male privilege is the most privilege group of all.

Nope. That's likely rich white cis-gendered heterosexual able-bodied young female.

Why are white men trying to insult other people's prophets.

You mean like Ayaan Hirsi Ali? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayaan_Hirsi_Ali

Atheists criticize religion because religion is dumb. That has nothing to do with race or sex.

See that is the white privilege, you feel you should be able to insult other groups but go nuts if other groups insult you.

You mean like how Saudi Arabia classifies all atheists as terrorists and commits genocide against apostates? But then if an atheist depicts the prophet Mohamed (which isn't even against Islam since there is no risk of idolatry) they should be killed?

[jacee]

Nope. That's likely rich white cis-gendered heterosexual able-bodied young female.

Nope.

White males get more top level jobs, promotions and pay.

.

[-1=e^ipi]

White males get more top level jobs, promotions and pay.

Have is probably a more accurate verb here.

Men are conditioned by gender roles to work more, to an early grave, to benefit women. Differences in reproductive utility cause this behaviour discrepancy.

[H10]

You need to learn the distinction between facts and opinion.

---SNIP---

White privilege is a fact. No, " "White Privilege" is not a fact - it is an opinion put forth by researchers with an agenda as a way to explain the actual facts. " No, that is an opinion!

The Onus is on you to prove the entire body of reasearch wrong because you are arguing against the more widely held position amongst the expert community. Most people think the world is round, if I argue its flat, the onus is on me to prove that you will sail of the edge of the planet.

It is your opinion they cherry picked data and had a pre-determined narrative. In fact your opinion is full of logical errors. Because it is much more likely that the opposite occured. White privilege was widely believed to exist, so researchers conducted studies to find if it exist and verified its existence. This is how science works. People make hypothesis, then the researchers look for evidence to see if this is true or not.

I provided multiple sources on white privilege, you call them my opinions. You are an expert in knocking down strawmans.

You haven't proved white privilege isn't there. In fact your very statements of denial are precisely what the original study posted by the op are about. White privilege causing white privileged males to deny their privilege and exaggerate how bad they have it to disassociate with the privilege. Which is not suprising. It is the same reason why people like Ann Romney or Hilary Clinton think they are "not rich" or "not wealthy" while they rake in piles of cash most people could only dream of.

Edited November 26, 2015 by H10
[---SNIP---]

[H10]

Maybe it was a different study. I don't have time to check right now.

---SNIP---

It was a different study if you are correct. Because that study, showed opposite. I will agree there are exceptions. But does that mean we should make policies for exceptions or for general rules?

Who made the sexist traditions?

How are white women more privileged than white males when most ceo's and very rich and powerful, and particularly unqualified men getting crony favours are white men. Harper's cabinet was a good example of that.

Atheists-whitemales believe this. but that is the white privilege, they make these broad statements as if no one else view matters. religion is dumb and that is that because the white male says so.

Saudi Arabia is run by turkish descendant people from the ottoman colonizers, the indigeneous saudis are not even the same race and neither are most saudis turk breed purely, and turkish people are now claiming to be white, so you are in a strange situation where the saudi royals are white or claim to be white. this is no surprise actually, most of the ottoman empire colonies still have turks ruling them today. Just like how the queen of kenya is white queen elizabeth in england.

Edited November 26, 2015 by H10
[---SNIP---]

[H10]

What on Earth is wrong with insulting someone else's prophet?

offensive to islam. It would be like a muslim asking what on earth is wrong with wearing a swatika or insulting jews.

[-1=e^ipi]

But does that mean we should make policies for exceptions or for general rules?

We should make policies for individuals and treat people as individuals.

Who made the sexist traditions?

People. Women, men and non-binary people.

How are white women more privileged than white males when most ceo's and very rich and powerful

Because there is more to privilege than number of CEOs. Also, why there are more male CEOs is due to men having less intrinsic value to society and having to work to obtain value; this is explained in my reproductive utility thread.

particularly unqualified men getting crony favours are white men. Harper's cabinet was a good example of that.

Cronyism and corruption exists for all races. Here is the level of corruption around the world:

Seems countries with less white people are more corrupt.

but that is the white privilege

Atheism is white privilege?

they make these broad statements as if no one else view matters.

All religions are dumb. That's independent of the race or sex of the person saying it.

religion is dumb and that is that because the white male says so.

No, it's dumb because it's dogmatic, ignores empirical evidence, and often leads to bad outcomes.

[cybercoma]

"Perceived corruption" is far different from actual corruption

[-1=e^ipi]

The Onus is on you to prove the entire body of reasearch wrong because you are arguing against the more widely held position

That's not how the scientific method works. The scientific method gives preference to the null hypothesis and to simplicity. That's why Occam's razor and Akaike's Information Criterion are used in science.

And btw, the most widely held position about the burden of proof by philosophers of science is that the burden of proof lies on the person arguing for the more complicated model of reality.

White privilege causing white privileged males to deny their privilege and exaggerate how bad they have it to disassociate with the privilege.

So if white people admit that white privilege exists then that is evidence of white privilege. But if white people deny that white privilege exists then that is also evidence of white privilege? Do you not see the problem with that?

[Guest]

offensive to islam. It would be like a muslim asking what on earth is wrong with wearing a swatika or insulting jews.

What if the prophet was Joseph Smith?