Fragility connotes vulnerability, and that state of fear generates hatefullness. Look at how the so-called Palestinians and their supporters have been disgracing themselves lately with their overt Jew hatred. Probably a bonding point with many Amercan blacks.
I like watching/reading Glenn and John. But they frequently miss an elephant in the room: Racism is not exclusively white against black. Racism comes from all directions and goes in all directions.
It is telling that, as Glenn and John discuss black people's interpretations of racism and the degree to which it exists in America, they presume that the only racism that needs considering is white racism against blacks. That constitute one HUGE blind spot.
By numbers, cops kill far more whites than blacks. That changes, when you measure by percentages. But in either event, the deaths of whites, either at the hands of cops or of blacks, is essentially ignored. THAT is racist.
Big fan. Watch your clips on YouTube often. You add much needed context and nuance to discussions.
Question for everyone-
Why is it that we have come to labeling- associating emptions or a state of being with race? Emotions and being human are not race based. There might be nuanced reasons for people of different backgrounds to have experiences that provide us with emptions or responses, but is there any evidence that there actually is “white or black fragility”?
The Head of the Joint Chiefs recently testified before congress and made a point that he wanted to understand “white rage.”
I do not believe in “white or black rage.” I don’t think such things exist. I believe that humans can feel rage. I believe there might be some societal reasons for subgroups to have such emptions, but I fundamentally disagree that such emptions can be race based.
It gets on my nerves when this kind of stereotyping occurs. I understand your use of the
“flip side” in some of these debates, such as the use of the term “woke racism.” To fight stereotyping and labeling, you must delve into the terminology that has been generally accepted, I suppose …
But terms like “white fragility” or “white privilege” that connotate negative associations with a racial group are bunk in my opinion. Such terms should be called out for what they are- ridiculous.
Such terminology is nonsense, and I wish it would be relegated into a category of laughable obfuscation where it belongs- but for now we are stuck with it.
Having to subject ourselves to this makes us all a little dumber. But here we are. Stuck in stupid land.
There are plenty of ways people mistreat each other which have nothing to do with racism. At some point, ideally, it will fade into the general background of people’s sharp elbows.
The older 1970's language of racism was, I think, more useful in describing social interactions than the current vocabulary of anti-racism. Those words being bias, prejudice, discrimination.
For example, it is entirely possible that Glen's greeter could have been a racist, but then, they might simply have been intimidated by celebrity, or unaccustomed to interactions with black persons, which is a form of bias, I guess, but not necessarily racist.
It seems to me we humans make judgments about each other all the time based on the available evidence: a haircut, mode of dress, behavioral idiosyncrasies, cultural markers—it is involuntary. We are not all comfortable with all people equally.
Some of it is threat assessment, and some of it is just the gossipy nature of human beings. We check each other out. The attempt to change this is futile, or worse, self-delusion. Fortunately, we don't have to act on our own first impulses.
My own personal experience tells me that things now are much worse that they were ten years ago, and, unscientifically, I blame anti-racism. Usually when you tell someone they have cause for righteous anger—they believe you, their resentment grows. I'm afraid I have noticed recently that the simplest social interactions now can carry a subtext of hostility. I wish it weren't so.
If you think women and blacks have it bad with "microaggressions"- ask today's Jews (or those from about 80 years ago... if they survived) how it goes forever and ever.
I feel the same way about mansplaining and other sexist microaggressions. Every successful women has stories of being overlooked or underestimated (“Where’s the doctor?” “I’m the doctor.”) but these are blips in otherwise cushy lives. Any other women’s issue you could name (sexual harassment, maternity leave…) is 100x more important.
There's a certain personality type found in any profession demanding high standards, the abilty to do research and interpret facts and situations--academia comes to mind. Anyone with a bad case of imposter syndrome (they're smart but always doubting themselves) can slide into feeling like a victim (which is so much easier and so much more ego-inflating than admitting, "I'm a bit of a masochist.") Imagining "they're all against me" is pleasanter than looking into that snakepit of one's own soul.
I wish all sides would get over the victimhood. If there are overt instances of racism or sexism and it has threatened one's life, livelihood or blocked the pursuit of making one's future, then I'll listen.
To be fair, it depends on who you are talking to / listening to. But regardless, I get where John & Glenn are coming from. Most people aren't super-objective in their opinions on any subject, especially the thorniest ones. And politically driven folks in particular are extra-inclined to spin narratives, even when they think they're being objective. It is a tendency that goes beyond race or political persuasion.
But yes, African-Americans (today) often overstate societal problems by way of personal experiences--that is not objectivity. We all have an f'd up story up to tell. But anecdotes don't paint an entire picture.
If you choose to speak with people for more insight about "What it's like to be Black", assess their objectivity first and foremost: Are they well-informed? Honest? Logical? Fair?
This is a prescription that should apply across the board.
I remember readng a Shelby Steele book (The Content of Our Character?) in which he recounts sometimes measuring white racism based on whether a white person would avoid touching his hand during a cash transaction. As a white person who was germophobic before germophobia was cool, I was alarmed: in these situations I had always tried to avoid touching anyone -- white, black, or anything else. Mr. Steele would have thought me a racist. What's a neurotic to do? It has been a battle between germophobia and fear of being thought a racist ever since.
Of COURSE racism exists. So what? Some people disparage others as a form of misplaced animosity or cathartic release. To paraphrase recent anti-Israel chants, what do you think human behavior looks like? That’s why data matters - “lived experiences “ is a lazy way of saying “I don’t care what the facts are...”. I have seen tribal and ethnic groups disparage each other in Africa, in the Middle East and in South America. It’s lazy and boring. I’m over it. In the United States, with the exception of substandard Union-controlled inner city public schools, black Americans have opportunities to succeed unparalleled in history, as many un indoctrinated immigrants from the Caribbean and Africa prove year in and year out. The African American community is being played as fools by the Democratic Party and race hucksters. The vast majority of AA’s are for school choice and keeping their communities safe from crime, but they are just patted on the head and told about systemic racism, decolonization and similar nonsense, mostly by white liberals. It’s a con, and I think most of Glenn and John’s readers know it.
Is black fragility a uniquely black phenomenon or just one specific expression of a larger, societal fraglility problem? These days, I see a lot of fragility everywhere I look (and along the entire political spectrum). Politicans of both parties whose whole brand is attention seeking tend to lose their minds at the slightest bit of unwanted attention. People on the right coined the term 'snowflake' as a pejorative reference to the whiny people of the left (of which there were and are many), but people on the right do just as much whining. Trying to ban books or drag shows is a kind of right wing fragility. Donald Trump is the biggest whiner in American public life (just listen to any speech of his or read his spcial media posts).
Fragility connotes vulnerability, and that state of fear generates hatefullness. Look at how the so-called Palestinians and their supporters have been disgracing themselves lately with their overt Jew hatred. Probably a bonding point with many Amercan blacks.
I like watching/reading Glenn and John. But they frequently miss an elephant in the room: Racism is not exclusively white against black. Racism comes from all directions and goes in all directions.
It is telling that, as Glenn and John discuss black people's interpretations of racism and the degree to which it exists in America, they presume that the only racism that needs considering is white racism against blacks. That constitute one HUGE blind spot.
By numbers, cops kill far more whites than blacks. That changes, when you measure by percentages. But in either event, the deaths of whites, either at the hands of cops or of blacks, is essentially ignored. THAT is racist.
I have a feeling that black guys will kill more black guys than Hamas will kill Israelis this year.
Side note, 100,000 people will die of drug overdoses this year.
Hey Glenn and John.
Big fan. Watch your clips on YouTube often. You add much needed context and nuance to discussions.
Question for everyone-
Why is it that we have come to labeling- associating emptions or a state of being with race? Emotions and being human are not race based. There might be nuanced reasons for people of different backgrounds to have experiences that provide us with emptions or responses, but is there any evidence that there actually is “white or black fragility”?
The Head of the Joint Chiefs recently testified before congress and made a point that he wanted to understand “white rage.”
I do not believe in “white or black rage.” I don’t think such things exist. I believe that humans can feel rage. I believe there might be some societal reasons for subgroups to have such emptions, but I fundamentally disagree that such emptions can be race based.
It gets on my nerves when this kind of stereotyping occurs. I understand your use of the
“flip side” in some of these debates, such as the use of the term “woke racism.” To fight stereotyping and labeling, you must delve into the terminology that has been generally accepted, I suppose …
But terms like “white fragility” or “white privilege” that connotate negative associations with a racial group are bunk in my opinion. Such terms should be called out for what they are- ridiculous.
Such terminology is nonsense, and I wish it would be relegated into a category of laughable obfuscation where it belongs- but for now we are stuck with it.
Having to subject ourselves to this makes us all a little dumber. But here we are. Stuck in stupid land.
There are plenty of ways people mistreat each other which have nothing to do with racism. At some point, ideally, it will fade into the general background of people’s sharp elbows.
Focusing on quotes made in barbershop talk deflects from real problems. Focusing on deflection rather than worthy advocacy is a choice.
The worst sin committed by LBJ. Was robbing blacks of their internal locus of control
The older 1970's language of racism was, I think, more useful in describing social interactions than the current vocabulary of anti-racism. Those words being bias, prejudice, discrimination.
For example, it is entirely possible that Glen's greeter could have been a racist, but then, they might simply have been intimidated by celebrity, or unaccustomed to interactions with black persons, which is a form of bias, I guess, but not necessarily racist.
It seems to me we humans make judgments about each other all the time based on the available evidence: a haircut, mode of dress, behavioral idiosyncrasies, cultural markers—it is involuntary. We are not all comfortable with all people equally.
Some of it is threat assessment, and some of it is just the gossipy nature of human beings. We check each other out. The attempt to change this is futile, or worse, self-delusion. Fortunately, we don't have to act on our own first impulses.
My own personal experience tells me that things now are much worse that they were ten years ago, and, unscientifically, I blame anti-racism. Usually when you tell someone they have cause for righteous anger—they believe you, their resentment grows. I'm afraid I have noticed recently that the simplest social interactions now can carry a subtext of hostility. I wish it weren't so.
If you think women and blacks have it bad with "microaggressions"- ask today's Jews (or those from about 80 years ago... if they survived) how it goes forever and ever.
The inquisition, what a show!
I feel the same way about mansplaining and other sexist microaggressions. Every successful women has stories of being overlooked or underestimated (“Where’s the doctor?” “I’m the doctor.”) but these are blips in otherwise cushy lives. Any other women’s issue you could name (sexual harassment, maternity leave…) is 100x more important.
There's a certain personality type found in any profession demanding high standards, the abilty to do research and interpret facts and situations--academia comes to mind. Anyone with a bad case of imposter syndrome (they're smart but always doubting themselves) can slide into feeling like a victim (which is so much easier and so much more ego-inflating than admitting, "I'm a bit of a masochist.") Imagining "they're all against me" is pleasanter than looking into that snakepit of one's own soul.
I wish all sides would get over the victimhood. If there are overt instances of racism or sexism and it has threatened one's life, livelihood or blocked the pursuit of making one's future, then I'll listen.
To be fair, it depends on who you are talking to / listening to. But regardless, I get where John & Glenn are coming from. Most people aren't super-objective in their opinions on any subject, especially the thorniest ones. And politically driven folks in particular are extra-inclined to spin narratives, even when they think they're being objective. It is a tendency that goes beyond race or political persuasion.
But yes, African-Americans (today) often overstate societal problems by way of personal experiences--that is not objectivity. We all have an f'd up story up to tell. But anecdotes don't paint an entire picture.
If you choose to speak with people for more insight about "What it's like to be Black", assess their objectivity first and foremost: Are they well-informed? Honest? Logical? Fair?
This is a prescription that should apply across the board.
I remember readng a Shelby Steele book (The Content of Our Character?) in which he recounts sometimes measuring white racism based on whether a white person would avoid touching his hand during a cash transaction. As a white person who was germophobic before germophobia was cool, I was alarmed: in these situations I had always tried to avoid touching anyone -- white, black, or anything else. Mr. Steele would have thought me a racist. What's a neurotic to do? It has been a battle between germophobia and fear of being thought a racist ever since.
Of COURSE racism exists. So what? Some people disparage others as a form of misplaced animosity or cathartic release. To paraphrase recent anti-Israel chants, what do you think human behavior looks like? That’s why data matters - “lived experiences “ is a lazy way of saying “I don’t care what the facts are...”. I have seen tribal and ethnic groups disparage each other in Africa, in the Middle East and in South America. It’s lazy and boring. I’m over it. In the United States, with the exception of substandard Union-controlled inner city public schools, black Americans have opportunities to succeed unparalleled in history, as many un indoctrinated immigrants from the Caribbean and Africa prove year in and year out. The African American community is being played as fools by the Democratic Party and race hucksters. The vast majority of AA’s are for school choice and keeping their communities safe from crime, but they are just patted on the head and told about systemic racism, decolonization and similar nonsense, mostly by white liberals. It’s a con, and I think most of Glenn and John’s readers know it.
Is black fragility a uniquely black phenomenon or just one specific expression of a larger, societal fraglility problem? These days, I see a lot of fragility everywhere I look (and along the entire political spectrum). Politicans of both parties whose whole brand is attention seeking tend to lose their minds at the slightest bit of unwanted attention. People on the right coined the term 'snowflake' as a pejorative reference to the whiny people of the left (of which there were and are many), but people on the right do just as much whining. Trying to ban books or drag shows is a kind of right wing fragility. Donald Trump is the biggest whiner in American public life (just listen to any speech of his or read his spcial media posts).