And if that isn't enough, it also helps them avoid being told that, because of their skin color, they don't deserve what they accomplish. Apparently, however, if they have problems it's more than they deserve - due to their skin color.
There are several things on here, BTW, that no longer apply. Watching the morning news shows, I can't help but notice there are only two white men among multiple women and men of various ethnic backgrounds. The same goes for books, toys and other items. We won't mention the talk we have with our boys about why most professional athletes in the sports we like don't look like them. Of course we have the phenomenon of not being told they are a credit to their race, but whatever my boys have is only because of their race.
But then, I've noticed facts and reality aren't high on the priority list in our modern culture, in or outside of our education system.
Yep. The reeducation zoos are in full force, dumbing down our kids down, pushing narcissism, hedonism and the belief that the world exists to worship them as the gods they are.
The problem with posts like this is that you are too much of a coward to say what you clearly want to say — that anyone who isn’t white and male should never, ever be in any position of power at all — so you use coy hints and bluff and coded language about ‘not being a credit to their race,’ which was a phrase commonly used for black people who managed to claw an achievement out from the hostile ground in which they lived. I also have two white sons, who manage to understand that their race and sex gives them privileges they did not earn and which they have a responsibility to use wisely. You, however, wallow in self-pity and teach your sons self-pity because someone, somewhere, notes that white people do not actually deserve every single scrap of good things our society offers, and that whatever our achievements are, they were not earned in a fair system. Your sons will be fine even if you note that they have unearned advantages.
ReplyDeleteYou went full Cathy Newman. Don't ever go full Newman.
DeleteCould you explain the unfairness of our country to my youngest? Until Trump, he never knew an America that didn't have a black president.
DeleteBTW, the reference to 'being a credit to their race' was simply noting what was said on the list in question. I merely turned it around and noted we're using the same basic concepts, this time saying a different ethnicity doesn't deserve everything they have as a result of their race. Same old mentality - different skin color.
History goes back further than 2008. Your youngest kid needs to learn that, and, for that matter so do you. You obviously don’t know the history of the phrase ‘credit to their race,’ so you could just start there.
DeleteI think you and your commenters worry that black people will treat us like they were treated.
Of course it does. But to him, his reference point began in 2009,and from that point on, he had to process why he, who lives in modest circumstances at best, is the privileged one, while his president with all the power and influence in the world is the victim of his privilege. Appeals to the past do no good when speaking about the present, which is what the current WP fad is all about (it's not about back when whites had privilege, it's about insisting that even here, today things are barely any different).
DeleteAnd I can't speak for others, but my fear is not blacks any more than any particular ethnicity, but it's fear that a movement that doesn't care about black people any more than it seems to care about women will merely exploit them until no longer convenient.
You have no idea what you call ‘the current WP fad’ is at all. Here is a very good and short discussion of what privilege means to actual progressives — real ones, not the straw versions you read about on Breitbart. Read it with an open and mind and learn something.
DeleteAlso, there is no way to discuss any political or cultural event in the present without discussing the past. You have seriously failed your son if you have taught him that the existence of Barak Obama means white people have no more advantages in society. For one thing, your son shoud not compare himself to a former president but to a black eight-year-old.
I don't see a 'here'. Was there supposed to be a link?
DeleteAnd you're talking to a student and teacher of history. I'm the first to say we need to look at the past - but honestly, not cherry picking, avoiding like the plague the nightmare of multi-culturalism, and certainly rejecting the modern wave of presentism that has come to dominate the current approach to understanding our past. That could be a reason for the sudden upswing in 'White Privilege!' If you misuse one discipline, it often spills over into others. But I'll withhold further comment until I see what you were referring to - again, if a link, perhaps just copy it out and I'll try that way.
Link: https://projecthumanities.asu.edu/content/ibraw-primer-privilege-what-it-and-what-it-isnt
DeleteEssentially, according to the link, privilege is saying that it's no big deal that it's easier for Chinese people in China than for non-Chinese people, just make sure if you're Chinese you're aware of that. Likewise in a community case, it's easier being black in certain sections of town than being white. It all depends.
DeleteI think if white privilege is kept there, it's not a big deal. But somehow, the recent trend of consonantly pounding the fact over, and over, and over, and over, and over again misses the point that it's really just a basic common sense observation that the majority in a particular culture has advantages. Just like if I packed up and moved to Iran or India or Nigeria, I'd be a a decided disadvantage.
Which is all anyone ever seems to insist they're saying, and yet whenever it is used nowadays, as in the above example, it seems to be saying a whole lot more (and in some cases, doing so erroneously).
I remember when the idea that we are guilty of wrongdoing by the nature of our birth was still called “Original Sin”.
DeleteDave, give the poor lefties a break. If they didn't have deviant sexuality to celebrate and whites to demonize they would have to stay ingloriously mute unless the subject of slaying children in the womb came up.
ReplyDeleteI've often wondered what the Left would look like if it kept every doctrine and policy position it has, but ditched the sex, drugs and rock culture, insisting on some old 'only in marriage' morality. I wonder if it would be as popular, especially among youngsters.
DeleteSex, drugs, and rock and roll are so much more fun than blue collar politics and labor issues. And much easier to raise money on.
DeleteThe Nashville Waffle House terrorist was a Christian homeschooler. The Austin bomber was a Christian homeschooler. Your system is supposed to prevent such things from ever happenting and to produce perfectly happy and amazingly succesful people. How do you explain these two?
ReplyDeleteHow do you explain the multiple cases of kids in public schools doing such things? Notice I never said 'Gee, if we homeschool, our kids will be perfect.' Hardly. But they won't be exposed to lessons directing them to believe progressive interpretations of sexuality, and they won't be exposed to lessons telling them that they and their condition should be judged based on the color of their skin. That's why we homeschool - among other reasons (including the farce that has become the public school system in the era of standardized testing). If I had said we don't homeschool because homeschoolers never do anything wrong, you'd have a point. As it is, you're still in need of one.
ReplyDeleteSome of the many reasons we homeschool. Stalin was the first to demonize motherhood and the nurturing of children. We can't expect any less from those who follow his lead. They will self destruct, as they have already murdered their future population within the womb. Many, once rebellious liberal women, have also awoken from the hypnosis of cultural marxism and gone back to traditional roots. Just because liberals make the most noise and throw the most tantrums doesn't make their lunacy legitimate and their neurotic paranoia only further deligitimizes their plight.
ReplyDeleteAs I've said, it's not that liberalism isn't nuts, but it holds the crown, scepter and orb of society: education, entertainment and the news media. So it's brand of crazy is unchecked and, against all common sense, mainstream.
Delete