Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

War Against White People

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Darth Executor
    replied
    Originally posted by fm93 View Post
    Which is why virtually every person I've ever seen positively comment on racial privilege is a well-educated, moderate-to-highly successful person.
    Right, the grifters are usually the ones whose opinions get published and who make money off it. The losers are in the comments.

    Leave a comment:


  • fm93
    replied
    Originally posted by Darth Executor View Post
    No, it's not about that. It's about losers who feel the need to blame their own failures or bad luck on someone else looking with envy on people who did well and spitefully trying to ruin them. People who aren't losers or who don't suffer from severe envy don't care if successful people brag about their success or not. There isn't a single person on this planet crying about white privilege who isn't either an envy ridden loser or a grifter.
    Which is why virtually every person I've ever seen positively comment on racial privilege is a well-educated, moderate-to-highly successful person.

    Leave a comment:


  • Darth Executor
    replied
    Originally posted by fm93 View Post
    It's not that you should feel bad for not being a loser. It's that you shouldn't boast too much about "being a winner."
    No, it's not about that. It's about losers who feel the need to blame their own failures or bad luck on someone else looking with envy on people who did well and spitefully trying to ruin them. People who aren't losers or who don't suffer from severe envy don't care if successful people brag about their success or not. There isn't a single person on this planet crying about white privilege who isn't either an envy ridden loser or a grifter.

    Leave a comment:


  • fm93
    replied
    Originally posted by Darth Executor View Post
    Guilting people for not being losers (which is what the talk of white privilege is) is nonsense.
    It's not that you should feel bad for not being a loser. It's that you shouldn't boast too much about "being a winner."

    Leave a comment:


  • Darth Executor
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam View Post
    The black population, when one controls for poverty, is no more probe to criminality than the general population.
    Not even remotely true. In fact the main reason why poverty correlates so much with criminality is because race correlates so much with both poverty and criminality. This is easily tested by pointing to places like Appalachia which are full of poor white people but without the same crime problems as, say, Detroit.

    Nevermind that "controlling for poverty" is begging the question. Correlation does not equal causation.

    Leave a comment:


  • Darth Executor
    replied
    Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
    What is nonsense about it? Being born into the west, into the ethnicity and gender at am puts me at a highly advantaged position compared to others. I've been aware of this since I was a little kid.
    Guilting people for not being losers (which is what the talk of white privilege is) is nonsense.

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    replied
    Originally posted by fm93 View Post
    There are more black fathers living with their children than without, and of the latter group, a higher percentage still interacts with them instead of abandoning them. None of this seems to bode with hyperbolic claims about the destruction of the black family, or that "there is something seriously wrong with that culture."
    As my linked showed there is a higher percentage of black dads absent from the home. And I'm not for a moment saying that black men can not be good dads. I have known quite a few growing up. But the fact is there is a crisis in the black family, with absent fathers - and if I remember correctly even Obama did a speech about it....

    CHICAGO — Obama Sharply Assails Absent Black Fathers

    Addressing a packed congregation at one of the city’s largest black churches, Senator Barack Obama on Sunday invoked his own absent father to deliver a sharp message to African-American men, saying, “We need fathers to realize that responsibility does not end at conception.”

    “Too many fathers are M.I.A, too many fathers are AWOL, missing from too many lives and too many homes,” Mr. Obama said, to a chorus of approving murmurs from the audience. “They have abandoned their responsibilities, acting like boys instead of men. And the foundations of our families are weaker because of it.”
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/16/us...bama.html?_r=0

    BTW - where in the study did it say that there are more black men living with there children than not - I did not see that.
    Last edited by seer; 07-14-2015, 07:24 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • fm93
    replied
    There are more black fathers living with their children than without, and of the latter group, a higher percentage still interacts with them instead of abandoning them. None of this seems to bode with hyperbolic claims about the destruction of the black family, or that "there is something seriously wrong with that culture."

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    replied
    Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
    So who's not to say that the anecdotes there are wrong and the study is right? It seems like you're just cherrypicking what you do like and dismissing what you don't.

    OK

    or instance, among fathers who lived with young children, 70% of black dads said they bathed, diapered or dressed those kids every day, compared with 60% of white fathers and 45% of Latino fathers, according to a report released Friday by the National Center for Health Statistics.

    The report leaves it unclear if black fathers, on the whole, are more involved than other dads. Although the survey showed that black fathers not living at home are as involved with their children as fathers of other races in similar situations, the higher percentage of black dads absent from the home could drag down the average involvement for all black fathers, other researchers pointed out.
    http://articles.latimes.com/2013/dec...-dads-20131221

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    replied
    Originally posted by Kristian Joensen View Post
    It comes to a conclusion that Seer doesn't like.
    It's not about liking anything:

    Yes, There's a Black Fatherhood Crisis

    By Robert VerBruggen

    ThinkProgress has a post -- "The Myth of the Absent Black Father" -- claiming that the crisis is a "racially-biased" fiction. This Los Angeles Times chart is provided as evidence:


    The problem, of course, is the "in similar living situations." When people speak of "father absence," they are mainly referring to the absence of fathers from the home -- that is, father absence is a "living situation." The assertion here is that, once you disaggregate by father absence, there's no racial gap in father absence.

    The piece concedes that "black fathers are more likely to live separately from their children" but claims that "many of them remain just as involved in their kids' lives." "Many" is a versatile word, but nonetheless the supporting evidence is rather weak: For example, 67 percent of black fathers who don't live with their kids, and 59 percent of white fathers in the same situation, see their kids at least once a month. Much stronger evidence on the importance of living with one's kids can be found in the chart above: There is no comparison between resident dads and nonresident dads -- of any race -- on even one of the metrics.

    http://www.realclearpolicy.com/blog/...risis_805.html

    Leave a comment:


  • KingsGambit
    replied
    Originally posted by seer View Post
    So who's not to say that the anecdotes there are wrong and the study is right? It seems like you're just cherrypicking what you do like and dismissing what you don't.

    Leave a comment:


  • Leonhard
    replied
    This discussion got ugly fast, I'm out.

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    replied
    Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
    What specifically is wrong with this study? Any issues with the methodology?

    Because I read things like this:

    http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...-People/page11

    Over 24 million children in the U.S. live without their biological fathers. These children are, on average, two to three times more likely to experience education, behavioral, health, and emotional problems; use drugs; be poor; engage in criminal activity; or be victims of child abuse than their peers residing with two (married) parents.

    Fifty percent of these fatherless children have never even been in their father’s home.

    With nearly two in three black children growing up without their biological fathers and the exaggerated association between black males and criminality, black men have become the ultimate symbol of personal failure—their abandoned children, the ultimate statistics. The issue of black fatherhood has become paramount to the larger conversation on parenting and socio-economic outcomes for children. If you’re not talking about black men, you’re not talking about absentee fathers.

    Even President Obama has opined on this national conversation, creating the Fatherhood and Mentoring Initiative and making responsible fatherhood one of the key priorities of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. While his speeches on fatherhood have been widely criticized in liberal circles for their conservative and retrograde content, the president’s rhetoric remains quite indicative of public opinion on the state of [black] fatherhood.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kristian Joensen
    replied
    Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
    What specifically is wrong with this study? Any issues with the methodology?
    It comes to a conclusion that Seer doesn't like.

    Leave a comment:


  • KingsGambit
    replied
    Originally posted by seer View Post
    Oh please, I don't for a minute believe that black men interact with their kids more that Whites or Hispanics. Or perhaps they have higher unemployment rates so are just home more.
    What specifically is wrong with this study? Any issues with the methodology?
    Last edited by KingsGambit; 07-13-2015, 04:10 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by Gondwanaland, Today, 03:02 PM
1 response
11 views
0 likes
Last Post seanD
by seanD
 
Started by CivilDiscourse, Yesterday, 01:58 PM
0 responses
49 views
1 like
Last Post tabibito  
Started by Cow Poke, 10-15-2021, 11:30 AM
15 responses
125 views
0 likes
Last Post rogue06
by rogue06
 
Started by Cow Poke, 10-15-2021, 10:20 AM
8 responses
65 views
0 likes
Last Post Cow Poke  
Started by CivilDiscourse, 10-15-2021, 09:43 AM
14 responses
159 views
0 likes
Last Post CivilDiscourse  
Working...
X