Why is it socially acceptable to stereotype and vilify white women as a whole?

[TheTERFnextDoor]

I've seen this a lot recently, often from other white women bizarrely, and I don't understand why it's socially acceptable?

I think it goes without saying that in most groups, you get good and bad people. White women are surely no different in that respect? Yes, many of them are privileged, and they don't face the discrimination that other categories might. I accept that. However, that doesn't change the fact that they aren't some homogeneous mass of people, surely?

I am genuinely trying to learn here, so I'd appreciate all responses, particularly those that disagree

Crying about bread does not translate to "getting black men killed" though, does it?

What I find astounding about the attempts to link white women crying to violence is the blindness you have to show to the actual source of violence: men.

No one on this thread has been able to provide a single example of crying by a UK white woman leading to violence against black men. Meanwhile, men commit 90% of violent crime, and a disproportionate number of their victims are black. So why are we not talking about ending male violence? Funny how, somehow, the hatred always ends up being directed at women.

Also being irritable with staff isn't ideal, i certainly don't differentiate between that from men, women, people of different races, anyone. If it feels abusive to multiple staff then it may be their racism towards your friend, or alternatively it may be that there is a problem with how your friend talks to staff. I don't think you can project your perception onto them without hearing their side.

I'm trying to picture somewhere where adults start crying in public over trivialities on a frequent basis as this isn't something I've ever come across. Admittedly I haven't worked in a public facing role for some years, but still.

@FrostyFifi I see. Then in that case I should have caveated it. One thing I cannot stand is when people discuss issues like male violence towards women and girls and topics like misogyny yet 'forget' to add that it's not all men. Especially when talking about misogyny and how it presents itself in for example work situations like meetings and so forth. It would really help before any such issue is discussed that it's stated 'not all men' or 'not all women' or in this case 'not all white women.' I fear otherwise the whole discussion would get derailed and not a single person would have any clue as to what is being discussed because it wasn't initially clarified that it's not all men. That's one reason the feminism boards on here do so well because all the women who post about VAWG, misogyny, preface their points with "not all men". I wish you'd been around on the threads where we were discussing the police - it would have really helped if someone had clarified that not all police offers are 'bad apples'.

Anyway, you carry on Twas an interesting thread to say the least.

I work in a public facing role in a situation where people feel highly stressed (urgent care/A&E). People understandably cry when given bad news about themselves or relatives. There are some sociocultural differences in how people react - in some cultures, it is expected that you will show very obvious grief, in others less so. But these are not racial divides. And there is certainly no epidemic of white women bursting into tears for trivial reasons - this seems to be another part of the fantasy around this whole trope.

I agree with a PP that black people receive societal disapproval if they express anger or emotion that, in a white person, would be tolerated. But it doesn't follow from that that white women are crying inappropriately, let alone that they are getting back men killed by doing so. It's just misogynistic nonsense.

I do find any argument that goes ‘all people who look like that behave like this’ doesn’t reflect well on the person making it

interesting food for thought regarding racism vs prejudice on the thread

@MissLucyEyelesbarrow your second paragraph was in agreement with everything I just said.
I can only talk about my experience working in retail and various other customer facing roles. Where women with nothing else really to get passionate about get very on edge about bread, or waiting times in the dentist, or Samuel's pre SAT test breakfast.

How do you know what random women have "to get passionate about"?

Jeez louise

generalise much?

So many men's inappropriately "passionate" reactions about trivial issues just completely ignored and accepted, it seems. Or is that not a thing? Because I've known many men get angry/snappish over nonsense. I forget that snapping at people is fine, it's only crying that is wrong.

Women crying do not get anyone killed. It's a ridiculous suggestion that melts away at the slightest analysis.

I cry when I get angry. I've always assumed it was female socialisation that meant that's the only way I can express anger. I try to stand up for myself and just end up a blubbering mess.

And I've also worked in various customer facing roles, from junior staff to middle manager. I don't recall white women and black women behaving particularly differently. I didn't cut white women or men any more slack if they were rude, snappish or demanding.

I cry when I get angry. I've always assumed it was female socialisation that meant that's the only way I can express anger. I try to stand up for myself and just end up a blubbering mess.

I know what you mean, I cried at work once because a male colleague was repeatedly harassing me and bullying me and once he came into the room and got in front of the door shouting at me (about a completely stupid thing, incidentally) so I couldn't get out. I really didn't want to cry, but I couldn't help it.

Is the lack of discrimination due to race a barrier here in the poor kid top trumps? A lot of very interesting information to be found in the government statistics

poor black kids do better educationally than poor white kids on average (poor Roma/traveller kids do worst)

in a poor deprived northern areas such as Blackpool it’s better educationally to be black than white

in terms of higher education in the uk percentage wise more black people are in higher education than white people

black people are less likely to be convicted of a crime than white people

however the arrest statistics are still an utter travesty of racism (especially when compared to the conviction rates) and the police do need to sort them selves out

Take home is that as usual Roma/white travellers do the worst in most outcomes. In light of the obvious discrimination and prejudice towards them the idea that there is no racism towards them because their skin colour is light is to me not correct and based on an American centric view of the world.

Read what I said again.

I agree that black people face societal disapproval for expressing emotion, especially anger.

But it in no way follows from that that white women cry frequently or excessively. That is misogynistic rubbish and just not true.

You don't solve racism against black people by making up negative stereotypes about white people. And you definitely don't solve violence against black people by pretending it's the fault of women, instead of the actual perpetrators.

Oops forgot by area

Exactly.

black people are less likely to be convicted of a crime than white people

Did you seriously say that with a straight face?

Yes. Check the official statistics, I’ve posted screen shots above and links below. They are less likely to be convicted but more likely to be arrested.

https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/crime-justice-and-the-law/courts-sentencing-and-tribunals/prosecutions-and-convictions/latest

*I agree that black people face societal disapproval for expressing emotion, especially anger.

But it in no way follows from that that white women cry frequently or excessively. That is misogynistic rubbish and just not true.

You don't solve racism against black people by making up negative stereotypes about white people. And you definitely don't solve violence against black people by pretending it's the fault of women, instead of the actual perpetrators.*

Exactly. Getting back to the original post (the OP seems to be sitting back and watching the bun fight), I wonder whether white women are negatively stereotyped precisely because they’re considered non-threatening and easy to silence? Easier targets than the actual perpetrators of violence?

What can someone do if you call them a privileged Karen-complain to the manager?

Did you seriously contest that without reading the actual link?

Still, never let facts get in the way of a good argument, eh?

(The lower conviction rate is actually suggestive of racism, if you give it a bit more thought - it suggests that black people are more likely to be arrested and charged for crimes that they did not commit, so more likely to be acquitted at trial.)

I wonder whether white women are negatively stereotyped precisely because they’re considered non-threatening and easy to silence? Easier targets than the actual perpetrators of violence? What can someone do if you call them a privileged Karen-complain to the manager?

Of course. It's an incredibly effective way of silencing women, especially women who are getting to an age when they might not feel the need for male approval.

And while we're all busy hating women for crying, men get to carry on doing whatever the fuck they like.

There’s a lot wrong with the uk racism wise: the arrest figures are a racist mess nationwide, the wealth figures are a bit more complex (great if your white or Indian, ok if your black carribean, rubbish if your Pakistani or black African) but it’s not a whole system of whites do well, blacks do bad.

Firstly the uk population simply can’t be split into white and black. White is the largest group but often contains white traveler/Roma who may not self identify as white. The second group numbers wise is Asian - in a simple black white split they may be grouped with black - but the Asian population is very different in wealth and education outcomes from the white or black ones. Then there’s the black population - often divided into black Caribbean, black African and black other - the black Caribbean population is often older than the black African population having been settled in the uk for much longer and so has accumulated much more wealth - these are people of the baby boom age - so bought houses cheap post war and are doing well on average like their white counterparts of a similar car compared to the younger immigrant or native population

so much of the debate appears imported from the USA which has a totally different cultural make up and set of issues than here. Bottom line remains as it has for ages - the group that has the worst outcomes for nearly everything in the Uk - education, wealth, health, reported racist attacks etc has white colour skin - the Roma/Irish travellers - I’m not saying this is a good thing not at all, the outcomes for this group of people shame our society. But if you want to identify the group of people in the uk with the system stacked against them you will find that if you simply reduce them to the colour of their skin you would label them as white.

The internalised misogyny is strong in this one.

Of course, women who are emotional in public must be all vapid freeloaders with nothing better to do, and it's not because they are carrying a huge emotional load, juggling work, home, family, caring for ageing parents, looking after the kids, doing way more domestic work and childcare (on average) than men, in pain from menstruation/pregnancy/mastitis, coping with the menopause, or dealing with chronic illness. Nope, it's just because they are lazy and manipulative.

Meanwhile, of course, if a bloke gets a bit stroppy, it's because he is Manly and Important, and it was probably a woman's fault anyway.