White Men are the Most Discriminated Against Demographic

[BoodeBeep]

My boyfriend has just said this to me. His reasons were women and ethnic minorities get schemes/help/AWS etc. I asked why exactly he thinks they have them, who they were trying to equal women up to etc. He said we should have a meritocracy and I agreed but explained we haven't ever ever had that and not all men are there on merit. I asked if he thought the reason there wasn't 50/50 represention was because women just weren't up to it and he said of course not but what other explanation is there?

I left it because there is just no getting through the complete arrogant certainty that he is right despite having done zero reading around the subject, having zero experience of being a woman/ethnic minority and seeing and hearing the experiences me and many other women have.

It's so frustrating. He's generally great but blind on this issue and obviously unwilling to think about it in any depth beyond how it may affect him should he fall victim to the discrimination of an all women shortlist.

Do men ever really get it?

"What DiAngelo and Bergdorf are explaining badly are structural racism and unconscious bias"

I think you should go back and read again what I wrote. It's nothing to do with unconscious bias, the theory argues that ALL white people are automatically racist and unaware of their own racism

As I quoted "white people have racism coming out of their pores"

I believe Munroe rephrased it as "drenched in racism"

And absolute lolz at thinking unconscious bias is legitimate

www.chronicle.com/article/Can-We-Really-Measure-Implicit/238807?cid=at&elq=e02fa393fe484aaa8833c2b7e79633eb&elqCampaignId=4836&elqTrackId=6c65e0853c3f4d82befeb09f3b704aa0&elqaid=12009&elqat=1&utm_medium=en&utm_source=at

@fmsfms Anybody that thinks that territorial expansion, conquest, subjugation and exploitation of adjacent cultures is exclusive to white people is as ignorant of history as Bergdorf.

And yet the Swiss manage not to do this. Schoolyard violence and bullying are widespread, but that doesn't mean that the feral boys who battered me and my sister were right to do so. Just because nation A can invade and colonise half a continent, doesn't mean they should.

Not sure what the point of that post was.

Not sure what citing Switzerland proves.

Nowhere have I said that colonialism was justified.

@fmsfms theory argues that ALL white people are automatically racist and unaware of their own racism

That's what unconscious bias is. I would agree with "ALL", we live in a society designed for our convenience and it affects us profoundly. When did you last see a birthday card or women's magazine cover where the person shown was black? Why is "nude" underwear white people's nude and never black.people's nude? All that "white = normal" messaging sinks in.

Unconscious bias is legitimate and your article doesn't say it isn't. Your article does cast doubts over the accuracy of Harvard's measuring tool.

"That's what unconscious bias is."

No it's not. Please go read up on white fragility theory seeing as my explanation hasn't sunk in

There is a world of difference between preferring white faces on a test and unconsciously continuing slavery and white supremacy, lol

As for the rest of your post,, Britain is 87% white. Munroe Bergdorf is doing just fine considering she's only famous because she said white people are drenched in racism, lol

lol is not a punctuation mark.

@fmsfms There is a world of difference between preferring white faces on a test and unconsciously continuing slavery and white supremacy, lol

Actually they are the same thing when the person preferring white faces is a hiring manager at a company that a black person wishes to work at. The bias leads to unfair treatment, which in turn perpetuates white supremacy. Racism happens when prejudice (preferring white faces) is combined with power.

And it does "seep out of our pores" because white people, in a white-dominated society, see whiteness as "like us" and "normal" and blackness as "other" and "strange".

Bergdorf was famous as a trans mixed-race model long before making comments about race.

I cite Switzerland and school bullies to make the point that, just because you can invade a quarter of the world and abuse the people already living there and exploit resources, doesn't mean you should. And it sure doesn't mean you get let off the hook for it afterwards.

Britain is 87% white

This doesn't stop us from drawing black kids on birthday cards, or having black comic characters. It doesn't stop us from having lingerie available in a variety of browns, even if it's on a "we only have the white people kind in branch stock but you can try on for sizing and we will order in the shade for you on request" basis. It doesn't stop us from putting black women on lifestyle magazine covers.

Britain is 87% white

When I studied English at school, all the authors were white and most were men. The books were boring. At the moment I have just finished reading all the books by Chimamanda Adichie and they are enormously better than Jane Austen. I am now looking for more Nigerian authors. I didn't even know Nigeria had an english language literary tradition until six months ago. This lack of representation in school curriculums not only harms black authors, it harms white kids who get turned off reading because the material is tedious.

wow so much wrong with all 3 posts, where to start

"The bias leads to unfair treatment, which in turn perpetuates white supremacy"

I'm not going to keep discussing the debatable topic of unconscious bias because it's not relevant to the topic of white fragility. By continuing to bring it up you are demonstrating a lack of understanding of white fragility and changing the subject. Oh and because unconscious bias is questionable anyway.

"Bergdorf was famous as a trans mixed-race model long before making comments about race."

No she wasn't, here's the Google search history for "Munroe Bergdorf" LOL trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y&geo=US&q=munroe%20bergdorf

"I cite Switzerland and school bullies to make the point that, just because you can invade a quarter of the world and abuse the people already living there and exploit resources, doesn't mean you should. "

Wow! Still missing the point that at no time in this discussion have I said colonialism was justified.

Still missing the point that at various points of history tribes, civilisations, cultures of ALL creeds, colours and religions have expanded via conquest and subjugation of their neighbours.

"This doesn't stop us from drawing black kids on birthday cards, or having black comic characters. "

I'm sure people that want black kids on birthday cards are capable of finding them.

Is having kids on kids birthday cards even a thing? Judging from this selection of boys cards it isn't www.cardfactory.co.uk/cards/birthday-cards/birthday-cards-for-son

"or having black comic characters."

There are loads, stupid false comment.

"It doesn't stop us from putting black women on lifestyle magazine covers"

The cognitive dissonance between making this post directly after referring Bergdorf is unreal. Black models exist and some are quite successful.

Is it a problem if in an 87% white Country the majority of faces on a catwalk are white? - no

Do models of every race deserve equal opportunity - yes

"When I studied English at school, all the authors were white and most were men."

Ok, this is starting to sound like a personal anecdote. I studied Jane Austen at school - what's your point.

Why wouldn't ENGLISH LITERATURE being taught in a British school use authors of influence like Shakespeare, Austen etc.

Oh no, they happen to be white = guess what, England/Britain was a white Country and mass immigration/multi culturalism only started in the 50s

This whole decolonise the curriculum thing is nonsense. Britain is a historically white Country. You want to study history in Britain then expect to get taught mostly about British history.

You want to study history of then there are plenty of America/Africa/Asia Studies courses at University.

"The books were boring"

Subjective.

"This lack of representation in school curriculums not only harms black authors, it harms white kids who get turned off reading because the material is tedious."

LOL. The notion that reading books written by other races is harmful, I mean wow - that's absurd.

That sounds very similar to the absurd racist nonsense that is cultural appropriation - the idea that art/culture should be siloed and off limits to other races. I'm mixed race and I don't recall ever thinking that reading books by white people was harmful. What absolute poisonous nonsense you are spouting

I think I'm done with your nonsense

I posted the search history trends for Bergdorf in the US, posting the UK one, guess what it's almost exactly the same - nobody cared who she was or was searching for her until she went on her racist diatribe

trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y&geo=GB&q=munroe%20bergdorf

I'd never heard of her before the L'Oréal debacle. There must be 10,000s of models- very few are actually famous.

LOL. The notion that reading books written by other races is harmful, I mean wow - that's absurd.

That is so not what I said. I said we should read books by other races.

This whole decolonise the curriculum thing is nonsense. Britain is a historically white Country.

But our Empire wasn't, and we were happy to wear Indian cotton and drink Sri Lankan tea and drink Kenyan coffee and eat Caribbean sugar, but not so happy to read books written by the people of those countries.

You want to study history in Britain then expect to get taught mostly about British history.

I wasn't talking about history. I was talking about English, which schoolkids do not get a choice about studying. English literature refers to english the language, not English the people, otherwise you couldn't have Scottish authors or American authors represented (Harper Lee was on my curriculum and is American). (Unrelated, but re Shakespeare, I've said for a long time that plays should be performed and watched, not read.) If we can have American authors, we can have Nigerian ones.

the idea that art/culture should be siloed and off limits to other races

Is exactly what I've been arguing against.

Ok, this is starting to sound like a personal anecdote. I studied Jane Austen at school - what's your point.

The national curriculum is standardised, so dismissing my account as an anecdote doesn't work here. What I was taught, every kid in the country was taught.

Bergdorf may not have been a household name, but she was a big enough name in modelling to be picked by Loreal.

In 2014, the Daily Beast were concerned enough about the shortage of black superheroes in films to write about it, although I concede that there are black characters in modern comics.

I think I'm done with your nonsense
I'd be quite happy for you to stop posting seeing as you appear totally unable to comprehend HaXXors very clearly articulated posts.

She said black authors are harmed by not being included on curricula. And of course they are because it's denying them the profile they deserve and the consequent income.

She said nothing about harm being done to readers.

Your unconscious bias is showing. Again.

the theory argues that ALL white people are automatically racist and unaware of their own racism

Having reread the article twice, I've decided I'm happy with having "automatically racist" applied to me. I walked through life blissfully unaware of my own white privilege until I started paying attention to what women of colour were saying. If not being called racist is more important to someone than working on not being racist is, that person is still part of the problem.

Quentin, I did say that school-aged readers would be harmed. Being forced to read the turgid archaic prose of Jane Austen would be more likely to put a kid off reading than Adichie's vivid descriptions of Nigerian life.

www.cardfactory.co.uk/cards/birthday-cards/birthday-cards-for-daughter shows a lot more people, and one might be south asian, the rest are unequivocally white. If you pick the boys' cards, you get fewer people (hello sexist stereotyping) shown.

@QuentinSummers

Why haven't you taken me up on my offer of £1000 to quote where I said I am a man?

www.cardfactory.co.uk/cards/birthday-cards/birthday-cards-for-daughter

There's more cards with no people on than there is cards with people, which proves you're making an issue where one doesn't exist. It's people like you that see racism everywhere that do your cause more harm than good

"but not so happy to read books written by the people of those countries."

Why should we? Shakespeare is one of the most influential authors/playwrights to have ever lived. The notion that "he's white, get rid of him" is PURE RACISM.

Whether the subject is history, English literature, science or philosophy the biggest criteria for whether someone or something should be studied is INFLUENCE.

Everyone knows who Shakespeare is, there's a reason for that.

Bored of your nonsense now. Won't be replying if this is all you can offer

Can't be arsed to spend several hours wading through your posts fms

because it doesn't exist

I did say that school-aged readers would be harmed. Being forced to read the turgid archaic prose of Jane Austen would be more likely to put a kid off reading than Adichie's vivid descriptions of Nigerian life

Completely irrelevant but both of them bored me although if there were only 2 books on a long train journey I'd probably choose Austen. Her prose isn't turgid or archaic- I just don't care about her characters.

Why should we? Shakespeare is one of the most influential authors/playwrights to have ever lived. The notion that "he's white, get rid of him" is PURE RACISM.

We shouldn't get rid of Shakespeare, because he is influential. But that doesn't mean we can’t read other authors from non-British, non-white cultures as well. It's not either/or. (Although to a limited extent, in terms of the curriculum, it is, because there is only so much time for each subject.)

" It's not either/or. (Although to a limited extent, in terms of the curriculum, it is, because there is only so much time for each subject.)"

Ok, so who determines what non-British - actually let's just say non-white because we all know it's about race and white = bad. Who determines what non-white authors are added to the curriculum?

Let's take the suggestion of the Nigerian literature.

Why choose that over authors from the Indian region, or from China, what about aboriginal or native American authors?

See this is the fundamental (at least one of them) flaws of identity politics - there's no end point to the number of groups/identities that must be taken into consideration.

Even if you stuck to Africa - Africa is a pretty big and diverse place lol.

The idea that just because some random mumsnet feminist enjoyed reading a book by a Nigerian author then that means all schoolkids should read that book is laughable. This discussion is so bad I feel angry at myself for engaging with it

I'll just make this easy, if you judge the works of Shakespeare or Austen by the fact they're both white and not by the content, hey then guess what - you're a racist