adailyriot:

(via Tim Wise - The Pathology of White Privilege)

This one goes out to auntieimperial.

*note: tim wise is not the best person to be constantly referencing, but he condenses a shit load of basic information that you SERIOUSLY need to hear right now. So turn this shit on in another tag/browser and take a serious listen.

darkjez:

justtrynatumble:

siddharthasmama:

darkjez:

cactustreemotel:

Apparently some people haven’t heard of affirmative action… being white HURTS your chances of getting into college and getting a job… That’s not an opinion its a law.  

O RLY?

"Applicants with white-sounding names are 50 percent more likely to get called for an initial interview than applicants with African-American-sounding names. Applicants with white names need to send about 10 resumes to get one callback, whereas applicants with African-American names need to send about 15 resumes to achieve the same result.



In addition, race greatly affects how much applicants benefit from having more experience and credentials. White job applicants with higher-quality resumes received 30 percent more callbacks than whites with lower-quality resumes. Having a higher-quality resume has a much smaller impact on African-American applicants, who experienced only 9 percent more callbacks for the same improvement in their credentials. This disparity suggests that in the current state of the labor market, African-Americans may not have strong individual incentives to build better resumes.”



»Racial Bias in Hiring
"The effect of race in these findings is strikingly large. Among blacks without criminal records,only 14% received callbacks, relative to 34% of white noncriminals. In fact, even whites with criminal records received more favorable treatment (17%) than blacks without criminal records (14%). The rank ordering of groups in this graph is painfully revealing of employer preferences: race continues to play a dominant role in shaping employment opportunities, equal to or greater than the impact of a criminal record."



»The Mark of a Criminal Record

"Over the past 30 years, a large body of research has shown that four factors consistently influence student achievement: all else equal, students perform better if they are educated in smaller schools where they are well known (300 to 500 students is optimal), have smaller class sizes (especially at the elementary level), receive a challenging curriculum, and have more highly qualified teachers.



Minority students are much less likely than white children to have any of these resources. In predominantly minority schools, which most students of color attend, schools are large (on average, more than twice as large as predominantly white schools and reaching 3,000 students or more in most cities); on average, class sizes are 15 percent larger overall (80 percent larger for non-special education classes); curriculum offerings and materials are lower in quality; and teachers are much less qualified in terms of levels of education, certification, and training in the fields they teach. And in integrated schools, as UCLA professor Jeannie Oakes described in the 1980s and Harvard professor Gary Orfield’s research has recently confirmed, most minority students are segregated in lower-track classes with larger class sizes, less qualified teachers, and lower-quality curriculum.”



»Unequal Opportunity: Race and Education

"In terms of impact, affirmative action and discrimination against people of color are completely different. Discrimination against people of color, historically and today, deprives those people of color of the right to equal consideration for various opportunities on equitable terms. While some may think affirmative action does the same thing to whites, in fact this is untrue. Affirmative action programs only deprive whites, in effect, of the ability to continue banking our extra consideration, and the credentials and advantages we have accumulated under a system of unfairness, which afforded us more-than-equal opportunities. There is no moral entitlement to the use of such advantages, since they have not come about in a free and fair competition. History — and ongoing racial bias against people of color — have served as “thumbs on the scale” for whites, so to speak. Or even more so, as the equivalent of a “Warp Speed” button on a video game. Merely removing one’s finger from the warp speed button cannot address the head start accumulated over many generations, nor the mentality that developed as a justification for that head start: a mentality that has sought to rationalize and legitimize the resulting inequities passed down through the generations. So affirmative action is tantamount to hitting a warp speed button for people of color, in an attempt to even out those unearned head starts, and allow everyone to compete on as level a playing field as possible. To not do so would be to cement the head start that has been obtained by whites, and especially white men, in the economic and educational realms. It would be like having an 8-lap relay race, in which one runner has had a 5-lap head start, and instead of placing the second runner at the same point as the first, so as to see who really is faster, we were to merely proclaim the race fair and implore the runner who had been held back to “run faster” and try harder, fairness be damned.



Finally, discrimination against people of color, historically, has had the real social impact of creating profound imbalances, inequities and disparities in life chances between whites and people of color. In other words, the consequences of that history have been visible: it has led to wealth gaps of more than 10:1 between whites and blacks, for instance (and 8:1 between whites and Latinos). It has led to major disparities in occupational status, educational attainment, poverty rates, earnings ratios, and rates of home ownership. Affirmative action has barely made a dent in these structural inequities, in large part because the programs and policies have been so weakly enforced, scattershot, and pared back over the past twenty years. So despite affirmative action, whites continue (as I document in my books, Colorblind, and Affirmative Action: Racial Preference in Black and White) to receive over 90 percent of government contracts, to hold over 90 percent of tenured faculty positions, to hold over 85 percent of management level jobs in the private sector workforce, to be half as likely as blacks to be unemployed (even when only comparing whites and blacks with college degrees), and to get into their college of first choice at higher rates than African Americans or Latinos.”



»Affirmative Action For Dummies

"As many as 15 percent of freshmen at America’s top schools are white students who failed to meet their university’s minimum standards for admission, according to Peter Schmidt, deputy editor of the Chronicle of Higher Education. These kids are “people with a long-standing relationship with the university,” or in other words, the children of faculty, wealthy alumni and politicians. According to Schmidt, these unqualified but privileged kids are nearly twice as common on top campuses as Black and Latino students who had benefited from affirmative action.”



» Ten myths about affirmative action

TL;DR—

"Yep, can’t look bad in front of the neighbors. If they see I’m a racist hypocrite, they might have to face their own issues, and then their kids would see them and have to figure their shit out, and nobody would come to neighborhood meetings any more because they’re too busy being decent human beings and everybody’s grass would get slightly too long, and nobody’d know what trees you aren’t allowed to plant in your yard, and the entire gated community will fall apart."
— My friend Alex on acknowledging his White Privilege and what would happen if every other white people did the same. (via thegoddamazon)

thegoddamazon:

masteradept:

catalpawaltz:

How do think cultural identifiers are formed? Everything that you do to visually alter your appearance from every item of clothing you own to your piercings and the way you style your hair can be traced back to some cultural appropriation. I honestly can’t think of one art movement that wasn’t triggered or developed by the mixing of cultures.

“Nothing is original. Steal from anywhere that resonates with inspiration or fuels your imagination. Devour old films, new films, music, books, paintings, photographs, poems, dreams, random conversations, architecture, bridges, street signs, trees, clouds, bodies of water, light and shadows. Select only things to steal from that speak directly to your soul. If you do this, your work (and theft) will be authentic. Authenticity is invaluable; originality is non-existent. And don’t bother concealing your thievery - celebrate it if you feel like it. In any case, always remember what Jean-Luc Godard said: “It’s not where you take things from - it’s where you take them to.”  - Jim Jarmusch

So when I read someone proclaim that no white person can wear there hair in dreadlocks because it’s appropriation and “stealing” from someones culture, I call bullshit. Nothing is original.

Oh, and the celts dreaded their hair too, not that it’s important.

How about its rude when some white girl is wearing a Native American War Bonnet? Or when that white kid with dreads proclaim they are Rastafarian but is not? Your privilege is showing. 

Here comes the privileged, white, “I’m in college so I know these things more than you” hipster, quoting other privileged white folks who advocate cultural thievery and subsequent erasure for their own “inspiration”, “pleasure”, and “entertainment”.

Because, you know, that’s the only reason us people of color exist: to entertain and provide for them. I’m so glad this white person cleared up for us, because for a moment, we were very unsure of our place in the world, but it is clearly to “inspire”, “entertain”, and serve your own ends and damn whatever culture and traditions we preserve.

Listen kid, I dare you to go to a Native reservation and spout that new-age hippie not-racist-but-racist bullshit.

"Simply put, what separates white racism from any other form and makes anti-black and brown humor more dangerous than its anti-white equivalent is the ability of the former to become lodged in the minds and perceptions of the citizenry. White perceptions are what end up counting in a white-dominated society. If whites say Indians are savages, be they “noble” or vicious, they’ll be seen in that light. If Indians say whites are mayonnaise-eating Amway salespeople, who the hell’s going to care? If anything, whites will simply turn it into a marketing opportunity. When you have the power, you can afford to be self-deprecating.

The day that someone produces a newspaper ad that reads: “Twenty honkies for sale today: good condition, best offer accepted,” or “Cracker to be lynched tonight: whistled at black woman,” then perhaps I’ll see the equivalence of these slurs with the more common type to which we’ve grown accustomed. When white churches start getting burned down by militant blacks who spray paint “Kill the honkies” on the sidewalks outside, then maybe I’ll take seriously these concerns over “reverse racism.”"

Tim Wise, Honky Wanna Cracker? Examining the Myth of “Reverse Racism” (via darkjez)

I read this essay a few days ago. It is really good.

I love this tumblr.

I love this tumblr.

stfuracists:

[IMAGE DESCRIPTION: The word “whiteness” in the middle of an “anti-symbol,” a red circle with a red line through it, to indicate “anti-whiteness.” In parentheses below, “but NOT anti-‘people who happen to be white.’ Below that, the URL “STFURACISTS.tumblr.com.”]

Read this carefully, white people… then re-blog it. None of it’s new, none of it’s mine alone, none of it’s my original research. It’s just that I’ve just learned from wiser people than myself and I attached a graphic above to get your attention. (And if you’re not white, I’m most likely not reporting anything new to you, but I hope you share this on your blog anyway.)

Whiteness is not a heritage, not a culture. It’s a system of oppression. It’s not anything to be proud of.

It’s fine to be interested in the countries your family tree comes from. Go ahead and be enthusiastic about exploring your background. March in your local St. Patrick’s Day parade, go to the Scottish Highland Games, have some German food and drinks at the next Oktoberfest. That your roots happen to be European, happens to be coded as “white,” does not equate to you being a bad person, not you or other people who would be considered “white.” (You all still could be jerks for other reasons, of course.) The problem isn’t with your “Everyone Loves A(n) [Irish/Italian/German/etc.] Girl” t-shirt. The problem is with the white people asking why “white pride” is criticized as bigotry, not realizing that it’s unavoidably synonymous with “white supremacy.”

Recognize that the reason some people of color express pride in their respective ethnicities is, in part, because they have had to assert their identity, their equality, their humanity. If you’re white, you haven’t been challenged over those things because of your whiteness. (Maybe if you’re a white person who isn’t male, cisgender, heterosexual, etc. But not because you’re white. Even if you were one of the first Irish immigrants and were discriminated against, it was because of your Irishness, not because you were white.) 

Pride in whiteness just means you’re proud to have undue privilege, proud of a tradition of oppression and disparity. You’re not getting oppressed for being white. That doesn’t mean you have to be ashamed for being white, it just means it’s nothing to celebrate or defend. It also doesn’t mean you get any points for claiming to be “colorblind” or saying “race doesn’t matter,” because all that means is, “I’m white, so I don’t have to think about race.” 

You should think about it. More white people understanding what whiteness is and how it affects the world might just help make things better. Maybe there will even come a time when “whiteness” is so far in the past, that there won’t be such a term as “white people,” just people who would have been described as that a long time ago. But probably not in our lifetime…

… so until then, the very least you can do is be aware. 

(If you’re new to reading my posts, start here. If any of my phrasing or word choices is confusing, refer to this and definitely check out that post’s links to others and their writing. Click the links in this post, look around at my blog, and click the tags to find more on each aspect of these subjects.)

voguedissent:

“Furthermore the comical aspect of the quote isn’t that Ron Paul has said or endorsed racist statements (because racism is not and never has been funny), it’s this magical belief that this special breed of all-knowing, all-seeing humans known as libertarians cannot be racist.”

-thenoobyorker.

Libertarians can’t be racist. It’s against the very definition; if you’re racist, you can’t be a real libertarian. And if you’re a real libertarian, you can’t be a racist.

Libertarians believe in personal liberties and rights, regardless of race, sex, sexual orientation, religious/political affiliations, etc. By hating a group (in this case, a specific race) as  a whole, you aren’t seeing those people as individuals but rather as a collective group - breaking the cornerstone axiom of libertarianism.

Some people are racist. Some self-proclaimed libertarians are racist. But those people, by the very definition of the word, cannot be true libertarians. It isn’t possible.

In what suspended reality are these dipshits living? Oh wait, it’s called white privilege. My bad. 

I see a No True Scotsman fallacy running around. Ironic for people who consider themselves to be the defenders of logic.

Wow, it’s like a mini-lesson in white privilege. Seriously, reading the justifications her fans threw out for racist videos was like reading the rantings of petulant little children who have never  been denied anything in their lives. “She really appreciates the culture, so it’s okay for her to do this!” etc. And of course, the ever-present “Well, people are just too sensitive!”

darkjez:

In this paper I explore white attempts to move toward a proactive position against racism that will amount to more than self-criticism in the following three ways: by assessing the debate within feminism over white women’s relation to whiteness; by exploring “white awareness training” methods developed by Judith Katz and the “race traitor” politics developed by Ignatiev and Garvey, and; a case study of white revisionism being currently attempted at the University of Mississippi.

via History Is A Weapon