White women that love black men, but are not "woke"

Well said. Each setting has its own particular norms and laws and history and means of furthering oppression against a dominated group. In the US, Native Americans and African-Americans are the specific subject populations and feel oppression most clearly. Other black populations that immigrate here often don’t experience things in the same manner, yet if you see them in a different context (Afro-Caribbean people living in the UK, Spain or other ex-colonial countries) they experience oppression that an African-American may be exempt from. That is why my focus has always been on ending all oppression, because otherwise you are chasing the latest injustice and you never uproot it all.
The US has an extremely well developed social control mechanism and can restrict your life chances while telling you that you’re free to your face and provoking extreme cognitive dissonance.

 

How don't black immigrants experience racism and anti blackness in the same way? I've been hearing this a lot lately but never seem to get a straight answer

 

There is a specific unique racism targeting black Americans that, while not exempt from, black immigrants are not the primary targets of. Further, the strong cultural bonds of black immigrant populations insulate them to a degree similar to other immigrant groups. Immigrants often know they aren’t welcomed by the native white population generally, but have a strong protective insulation within their own communities. African-Americans are simultaneously a part of and excluded from American society.

 

Fam that literally makes absolutely no sense. Insulated how? Black immigrants live in black neighborhoods with black native born folk. The cops don't come to BK hear a Haitian accent and say you're good but that dude over there gets their skull cracked. And while not exempt they are also the target of the exact same racism. Please be crystal clear and specific to what advantages black immigrants are getting. I'm not trying to come at you but I keep hearing this and I've yet to hear single coherent fact attached to this assertion. My dad gets pulled over just like your dad would. My mother would be denied the same home loan your mom would. If anything immigrant populations are far more vulnerable because they can be jailed and deported with absolutely no advocacy or protection in place because the face of immigration are lighter skin Latinos while black immigrant deportation makes up about of the cases

 

It’s a pain typing extensively on my phone so let me compile a more comprehensive response and get back to you shortly.

Okay here goes:

I wasn’t trying to imply that black immigrants are exempt from racism, just that it is expressed differently.

While anti-blackness is the central crux upon which US (and European) racism lies, it is contextual as well. Thus, color/shade/tone and peculiarities of local context give racism a different expression. This isn’t to imply that other black populations don’t experience racism, because post -1500 anti-blackness has become a global phenomena, but merely that the degree and focus of a given group of white racists can vary. I have experienced the difference in flavors of racism based on where I was at a given time (US vs Spain; English vs Spanish-speaking; recognized as American vs not, etc).
My apologies for the lack of completeness in my threads, as I’m running my mouth (keyboard and fingers) here and working simultaneously.
I draw much of my thought on the topic from this and similar works:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/3598300?seq=1

ive got an idea: I’ll type on my personal laptop and then cut and paste over to my phone and then send it. I have a feeling thus will entail a substantially longer conversation.

 

OK let’s try voice to text while I walk to pick up lunch for the office. That may make it easier than typing. Space with reference to my earlier comments, I was trying to express that while all subject to anti-black racism, different black populations experience it differently according to the local context in which they find themselves. I was not referring to US situations and context exclusively. For example a black Latino can be at the bottom of the social structure in a Spanish speaking country and discriminated against, yet be treated better by his white Latino countrymen when abroad and the US, we’re both may be subject to anti-immigrant hostility. This is some thing I have seen in my family. Conversely, I personally have experienced different treatment in the US based on whether I am viewed through an immigrant or an African-American lens. In addition, I have also experienced different treatment in SpainBased on whether they viewed me as an American hence wealthier and from a powerful first world country rather than as a resident of a foreign colonial possession, who they look down upon. My black skin remains constant throughout all these experiences.

 

Sorry for the long winded response. Essentially what I am saying is that all Black people are subject to anti-black hostility in varying degrees and in varying forms. That condition, as well as the varying cultural resources that they bring to a given situation, can help them maneuver through this situation with Greater or less success, depending on the particular conditions.

 

I appreciate your thoughtful and eloquent response my friend but allow me to push back a little. So I shared similar experiences where when I go to different countries my blackness is treated differently because of my American status in comparison to my continental African brothers and sisters. My critique of your original comment was based on the existence of being a child of Jamaican immigrants living in New York. My parent's accent or Jamaican status afforded us no better place to live or better employment in fact it hurt them because people often couldn't understand them. It didn't make my situation any easier as well I still heard the N word like I was any old black person despite where my parents came from. Police still harassed me when I drove and I was still denied service like my friends who had roots in the south. The literal only difference I had was having a passport and going on trips out of the country at a young age but that was also common with my friends who had educated American parents with means. The only major difference is we didn't use hotels.
And my story isn't unusual.
I think collectively we all gravitate to the same music the same trends and more importantly have developed a social consciousness that spans through out the country. If I see another black man anywhere in the country the head nod is universal. If I want a good cut I gotta go to the hood. If I want to find a community that will embrace me find a local church.
We are a community in the truest sense of the word.

 

I completely agree with your assessment of the New York experience. my father had an experience similar to yours being both African-American and Afro Puerto Rican. However, I was born in St. Louis Missouri, which is far less internationalized than New York. Many whites refer to Spanish speaking as “talking Mexican “. All people with black skin received poor treatment, but the type of treatment varied. As an African-American growing up there, I saw the familiar tropes of immigrant versus American and the arguments regardingHard work. I will say this though. After a sufficient time, In the United States most people of African origin become conversant in the mass culture of the majority of people of African origin in this country, which is African-American. The degree to which that majority black culture is reflected often goes hand-in-hand with the growing degree of shared experience of African Americans. Over time, styles of spoken English, dress and other customs converge, many of which weren’t that different to begin with. I guess my point is clearer with a sharply distinct population like Somalis, Ethiopian, African Muslims who dress in traditional clothing, etc. Whites routinely treated them differently (still paternalistically and racist, but far less aggressively, than African-Americans. They still suffered discrimination and weren’t welcome in certain communities but the sort of Klan-esque behavior that we received usually wasn’t directed toward them. People yelled “go back where you came from”, etc, but the sorts of standard features of life (police brutality being one) were meted out to them less frequently.

 

I think nyc is unique in the USA in having a largely internationalized population, where everyone is used to everything and everyone and so racism takes a familiar pattern. In some of the “heartland” areas, people are unfamiliar with anything except the simple black/white dichotomy. Anything that pushes that envelope overloads their thought processes. But I agree wholeheartedly that black people feel racism no matter where they’re from.

 

And that kids is how two grown men have differing opinions lol

 

You should see how women do it!

 

And scored some humor points to boot lol.

 

Yeah, I'm pretty conversative. I really wouldn't want to date too woke of a white woman. Its okay to acknowledge racism, but I think blm takes it too far. Also don't like the idea of every WW liking BM needing to be an activist. We are humans beings, you shouldn't have to take a class or read a book or go to a protest just to date one of us.

 

I like fully developed real people. I don't want some stereotype, nor do I want to be treated/viewed as one. I don't want to date a "woke" ww, nor one with a Salt & Pepa hairstyle and trunk jewelry earrings.

 

Life’s too short to keep up with woke culture. Most people in that culture are not being authentic. The ones who are authentic would’ve been Puritans looking to put us in a witch trial hundreds of years ago. I’d rather be mindful, respectful, personable than “woke”

 

My sentiments exactly.

I’m a left winger but I agree with you on that point. The “woke” requirement isn’t for me.

 

The thing is, the bolded part is essentially the explanation of how white privilege occurs in the West. Thus, while many called this poster the epitome of white privilege her post did go to the crux of what white privilege is, and while she said white privilege was BS she did summarise the way it occurs. It is suppose to be an unconscious (insincere ignorance?) benefiting from embedded societal mechanisms that benefit the majority.

Being okay with a black person being beaten senseless by a police officer is not white privilege, it's sadism, and if it's driven by racial prejudice it's racism and if it's socially driven by racial prejudice it's apartheid.

I would also agree with the notion that white privilege does not exist in China, they have not a geopolitical reason to subordinate themselves as a vassal state, they have always been an economic heavy weight and have even fended off multiple military powers. If anything whites are the model minority in China, not the privileged class, the mega wealthy families of China are Chinese, not white.

Chinese by and large do not necessary love whites and hate blacks. Like other Asian nations, they are acutely aware of geopolitical hierarchies, which in this military age, have at its top the major nuclear weapons countries, and in the middle, nations with navy fleets, while at the bottom are the landlocked nations, who aren't allies with nuclear nations.

African countries aren't interested in developing such nuclear weapons tech, they aren't that interested in space travel either. Why? They've got more important things to do, like build prosperity and fight corrupt politicians, and try to locally establish/maintain inter/intranational peace. Thus the top military countries in Africa are at most in the middle of the geopolitical hierarchy.

Unfortunately, The world sees that as weakness and not an example to follow, nevertheless the consequence is that blacks are not associated with global might, and thus not put on podiums
as the "ideal".

It would also be worth while considering that many nations subtly advertise themselves by showcasing only those who live far above the poverty line, however, most depictions of Africa are not of urban areas, but of the poorer areas of remote villages. I do not disagree with this practice in principle, as I think pretending that a nation's problems don't exist is a hardhearted thing to do, but a consequence of this is that everyone believes this is representative of life in Africa, which has a knock-on effect of strengthening inaccurate preconceptions about blacks.

There are atrocities being committed in all nations, there's slave labour, abuse, drug trade, drug epidemics, sex slavery ect. IMO if Africa had nations that were nuclear weapons heavy weights, the world would likely go from overstating the occurence of atrocities in those nations to understating it. What does that say about the world?

 

Personally, I think that "white privilege" is used to create the illusion of prosperity to the masses (majority group) by creating a faux second class citizen, in truth it is actually the construction of a third class citizen that has occurred, because the so called privileged class is actually the real second class citizen, and the elite are the first class citizen, people of many ethnic background may comprise the elite, unless the nation is gripped by an absolute apartheid.
By understanding human nature the (elites) give the masses (the majority) something on which to look down (the scapegoat, the oppressed, the victimised), so they won't look up to mount Olympus (where the spoils of looting the masses are kept), or look straight ahead at the world of injustice and oppression occurring in their (the masses) own vicinity against them.

In this regard I think the notion of white privilege does a lot of harm because it makes the engineered distraction all the more potent.

Telling someone they have white privilege isn't an effective way of fighting it, people either have principles about fairness or they don't.

Putting a race angle on certain issues of fairness and principles, won't make make one's argument more effective or impactful, and could actually castrate the argument.

A person with strength, principles, faith in God, and naturally, a love for the truth (not wilful ignorance), that's what makes an admirable person in my humble opinion.

 

In one sense, you're more right than you know. The notion of "whiteness" itself was invented to manipulate. And the "elites" certainly use that invention to their advantage. President Lyndon B. Johnson once said, "If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you." That sums up what I believe you mean.
Did LBJ Advocate: 'Convince the Lowest White Man He's Better Than the Best Colored Man'? | Snopes.com

But on the other hand, I think you undercut your own argument in your conclusion: "A person with strength, principles, faith in God, and naturally, a love for the truth (not wilful [sic] ignorance), that's what makes an admirable person in my humble opinion" (emphasis added).

If a person truly has principles and cares about truth, they must accept what is objectively true regardless of how they feel about it. And if one truly cares about fairness, they must accurately asses the state of things to determine what "fair" even means in context. The fact is that white privilege exists and is destructive. It's not the only privilege. It's not the only destructive privilege. But it is prevalent and uniquely toxic in our nation. This is in large part due to the fact that so many people refuse to talk about it and take it seriously.

Even so, I agree that it isn't always productive to highlight the race angle of an issue. To be most persuasive, you have to know your audience. But it's also a mistake to shy away from race/privilege at the cost of denying the actual state of things. We can't solve a problem we can't acknowledge or agree exists. Clearly there aren't easy answers.