Over on the Men’s Rights subreddit, the locals are pig-biting mad about racism. Are they organizing vigils for murdered black teen Trayvon Martin? Are they challenging the Hunger Games fans who are sending out racist tweets complaining about the character “Rue” being played by a black actress?
Nope. They are doing something much, much braver. They are taking on a white dude for mocking other white dudes who are convinced they are the truly oppressed.
Over on the Boston Magazine web site, blogger Barry Nolan sets forth this truly hateful argument:
I have been a white male all my life and to tell you the truth, I have found it to be a pretty sweet deal. … Wherever you look and by almost any metric, any statistic, it works out to be a pretty sweet deal to start out life as a white male. …
So I cannot, for the life of me, understand why so many white men like me can be found whining about how tough it is to be a white man. It’s a mystery to me how they came to feel so beset on every side by feminists, minorities, and “the system.” When in fact, the system is so stacked in our favor, it’s almost embarrassing.
On the Men’s Rights subreddit a post blasting Nolan as a “racist idiot” now boasts 90 upvotes. In the comments, the brave antiracists set poor Nolan straight on a thing or two. To Ellwood78, it’s just a big coincidence that most of the powerful figures in the US happen to be white dudes:
NoNoJCM, meanwhile, reports on his own bitter experience as one of the oppressed:
Irrel_M is apparently a Stephen Colbert fan who isn’t in on the joke:
To paraphrase Sojourner Truth, “ain’t I a white dude?”
–
Note: This post incorporates some
Rutee, a lot of things aren’t known when you live as a white person in a white small town and a nation that doesn’t want to look at the shit its doing. I have huge fails of knowledge when it comes to anything involving POC and am working to remediate that.
I find it strange to refer to a huge group of people spanning two continents as one race. Although, I think that trend is making its way up here.
This relates somewhat back to my comment earlier: I don’t see “Hispanic” as a racial category in the US (though people can use it that way). I do know (living in Texas) that the terminologies of HIspanic, Latino/a, and Chicano/a often mean very different things in various contexts:
http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/cdp/7/2/115/
http://www.elboricua.com/latino_hispanic.html
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-difference-between-latino-chicano-and-hispanic.htm
The issue isn’t what the “right” (single) term is, but what the population and people you’re talking to/about tend to wish (including identifying the contested issue).
SImilar problems arise with “Asian” and “American Indian” or “Native American” (these are umbrella terms for hugely diverse cultures and language groups).
This all, of course, begs the question that “race” is a category with any meaning. A couple of years ago, I found the page from the Ellis Island registry from when my grandmother came over. In the “Race” column, they wrote “Southern Italian.”
Pillowinhell; I think some of the current problems arise from people’s tendency to assume “ethnicity” (which refers to culture) is equivalent to “race” and use it in that way.
In the US, it’s even wonkier when you realize that the categories for race and ethnicity have changed every time the US census has been given:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_ethnicity_in_the_United_States_Census
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=4805&page=372
Go back to SHakespeare’s time, and the English considered the Irish and the French to be different races (and ditto)–so the meanings and connotations of ‘race’ have been very fluid because they’re socially constructed (but naturalized by that same ideology).
Cotton: “undesirable” European immigrants (Italians and Irish, especially, and especially poor) (and CATHOLIC) were often considered to be a different “race” than WASPs — it’s not that there is no meaning–social construction is reality (i.e. race is socially constructed, but that means people believe it exists, and racism is part of the idea that there is more than one human race). But meanings change.
I gather eastern European immigrants to the US were also considered undesirable as a race as well.
See: How the Irish Became White
http://academic.udayton.edu/race/01race/white13.htm
Re US racial categories: I don’t agree with all the claims here, but it’s a good overview of different terminologies:
http://www.uwec.edu/geography/Ivogeler/w188/4terms.htm
And just to blow your minds: racists will find a way. Texas attorneys using “Canadian” as code for “racial slur for black person.”
https://theframeproblem.wordpress.com/2008/01/30/is-the-term-canadian-the-new-code-word-for-racist-references-to-black-people/
@Shadow: Your focus is interesting here because the author of this piece is actually right about one thing; he’s benefitted hugely from white male privilege. He’s been able to travel the world reporting and shaping his reader’s opinions, he’s been an advisor to Congress, he has a massive amount of power which is inextricably linked to the fact he’s white and male, and he’s shown no willingness to give up any of his own power and privilege. For some reason though the fact that he is willing to use his position of power to tell other white men – many of whom he’s priviliged over via other axes of oppression such as class – to shut up because they don’t have it that bad seems to count as willingness to act against his own white privilege.
Note that there are no qualifiers in his piece – it tells all white men that they should shut up and that any forms of oppression they think they might be experiencing are in their imagination. Not only that, but his entire argument relies on treating class as irrelevant so he can conflate his experiences as someone who’s part of an incredibly tiny, incredibly privileged minority in terms of class with the experiences of others that aren’t so privileged (which is to say nearly everyone!)
@Myoo: well yes. Men get imprisoned more often than women, black people get imprisoned more often than white people, combine the two and you end up with a truly shocking number or black men in prison. (It would be a fairly typical example of intersectionality in action if it wasn’t for the inconvenient problem of men being un-oppressable.)
Poor downtrodden MRAL said, “I work hard.” I’m sure you do, man! White guys tell me all the time about how hard they’ve worked to get where they are, and I believe them! My white guy dad grew up very poor, and worked his ass off to make it through an engineering degree, get a good job, keep a good job, move up the corporate ladder, all of that. He worked super, super hard. Thing is, a woman, a POC, a disabled person, they could work just as hard and accomplish just as much, but their contributions aren’t going to be valued as highly. There’s a really big difference between “white men get whatever they want without effort” (what MRAL and other guys think we’re saying) and “white men put in effort and get rewarded for it at a much higher rate than anybody else” (the reality).
it’s not that there is no meaning–social construction is reality
No, that’s fair. A better way of expressing my point might have been “whether race is a category with any fixed meaning” or biological meaning or somesuch. Mainly just addressing the drift from linguistic-cultural community to “race” that Pillow raised.
@makomk
People may differ, so the following is just AFAIC. I don’t expect Nolan (or any other White person) to give up their jobs or their wealth in the name of acting against their privilege. Privilege is something society bestows on you, so it is by no means the White man’s fault that he is privileged. Working against your privilege refers to speaking out against the unfair, institutional privilege within society, and fighting against the structures that keep it there. One way is to support initiatives. Like I said before, affirmative action is one. Yet how many White people STILL think that Affirmative Action means that companies have to hire underqualified minorities over more qualified White folks? White men, as a class, have no room to claim oppression because being White and male bestows them with a LOT of privilege. Poor white men are oppressed on account of being poor, but they still receive privileges for being White and male that the non-White, non-male poor don’t receive. Ditto for gay White men, or disabled White men. And when poor White men start complaining about Affirmative Action, and immigration, and how those POC are running aroung committing crimes and making their neighbourhoods unsafe (completely ignoring the privilege that keeps them out of jails, or even out of crime in general), they are no longer allies but oppressors. The reason privilege is brought up is because the playing fields are uneven beyond the oppression that any one person or group faces and, when we don’t acknowledge that, we simply continue the oppressive systems that we have.
That’s not what Nolan said at all. He never said that rich people don’t have class privilege. Nobody has argued that white men can’t be oppressed for being economically disadvantaged, trans, gay, disabled, or any other axis of oppression. All he said was that white men are not oppressed for their race and gender. White people have white privilege. Men have male privilege. White men have white privilege and male privilege, but that doesn’t mean they can’t be oppressed on another axis.
Oops, ninja’ed by Shadow.
So, Canadian is the new n word? Cool. We’ve benn calling white racists down there dumb yanks since forever.
I personally laughed my ass off over the senators down there getting the vapours over Canadian terrorists. Since when has being offered Timmys coffee and some maple syrup by a friendly and possibly homesick Canuck a terrifying experience?
And then there wasa the idiot who wanted to nuke Canada over some really stupid shit,,,
Makomk, you are entirely missing the point here. First, so long as you want to focus on class issues(which are important) you give racists an excuse to overlook the bigger issue of racism, which overall has a bigger impact on POC. You can be wealthy and Black or Hispanic, and you’ll be treated better but you still won’t be treated the same as a white person when it comes to jobs, education, housing, medical treatment and most importantly,how your character as an individual person will be percieved.
At least this guy is aware that he has privilege. And that’s not something easily given up since other people will foist it on him. Unless of course he becomes poor. Do you really expect him to make that choice? If he’s aware of privilege and actively working towards undoing the harms of racism how will he do that as part of the unwashed masses?
And you are still overlooking the fact that even the most downtrodden of white people have it easier than POC. There are likely many cases for white men where this is not true and privilege does not apply to them, nor are they expected to make sacrifices for benefits they don’t have.
I was mainly referring to white privilege. If you’re white, you have it. I’m white and I have it. But now that I’m aware of it, I see how pervasive it is, and it’s bullshit.
But please, expound upon all us Western, spoiled, pampered princesses and how good we have it and how shit you have it. Sounds fascinating.
OMG, I can’t breathe for laughing!
Also
The whole routine is funny but 3:50 is relevant to the article. As you can see, Canadians already know what’s up.
@Lady Zombie
You would think so, but sadly… Well, you’ll see
@Shadow I know. I was being sarcastic.
@Lady Zombie
Ahhh, makes sense. I have to admit, Tom resparked my naive excitement for a while, but then he fizzled out so fast that I’m not even certain if that excitement was just a dream 🙁
Don’t hold your breath waiting, Shadow…. OHIP covered routine eye exams for all ages under any/all circumstances up until 8 or 9 years ago, when they stopped coverage (except under prescribed circumstances) for those between the ages of 20 and 64. I can’t imagine that they’ll start implementing coverage for prescription lenses anytime soon.
That kinda puts me in mind of Evil Penis’ comment at the linked article:
Yeah, some did and some did not (eg., transfer of wealth/position/power through inheritance). And then let’s forget how the institutionalized (both secular and religious) discrimination that did not (and in some areas, still does not) allow for anyone other than white males to be put on the path to achievement for all their hard work could be viewed as a type of “affirmative action” style plan.
Their reaction has a bit more to do with this than with being offered maple syrup. My problem with the idiocy over what is going on here on the southern end of the US has to do with the fact that when an actual terrorist was found to be crossing into the US to blow up LAX, the reaction by the right wing nutters was nothing like their reaction to poor people crossing a desert in search of work that the right wing policies caused them to have to do. But the reaction was not made in a total vacuum and the Senators had reason to be concerned because that is part of their job.
And Hispanic is the term used mostly down here in AZ when it comes to the ALEC written
hatelaw enforcement legislation.@Pam:
I heard you like blockquotes, so I put a blockquote in your blockquote so you can quote while you quote.
Okay…we get some real swell people over here. How long are refuge claiments detained before they are allowed in the US and under what conditions? Canadians aren’t going to be happy about considering that, especially when the vast majority are law abiding people who want to work for something better.
The other thing which leaps to mind is..why is the US such a target? I mean, these groups are here in Canada and could wreak havok here. What springs to mind is that yes, the Canadian government needs to weed out criminals and terrorists better. I don’t think there’s much argument here on that. However, the US needs to do something about why they are such a target. Although sometimes I think the US takes the hit for some of the shit Canada and Canadian corporations pull or enable.