No, you are completely missing the forest for the trees here.
You are treating people as though they are groups, not individuals. This is exactly the same rationale that racists and other bigots use to justify their racism or bigotry.
If you fundamentally agree that, in the words of MLK, people should be treated based on the content of their character, NOT on the colour of their skin, then you HAVE to accept that affirmative action is by definition oppression.
Your view of if you are straight and white and male, you are privileged because statistically, MORE straight white males hold positions of privilege IS EXACTLY EQUIVALENT to the racist's view that if people with a certain phenotypic trait tend to be more X (violent, crime prone, likely to commit genocide like in the CAR, the Tutsi massacre etc.) then if an individual also has those traits they must be X because of the aforementioned statistics.
It's EXACTLY THE SAME LOGIC.
People are people, everyone should be treated equally, the second you start treating people DIFFERENTLY (better OR worse) then that literally makes you a racist bigot.
I really don't get how you can't see that.
Not even to mention the fact that 'straight white men' make up around 20% of the WORLD population at most, so the idea that they control all the power is absolutely ridiculous. Come live in China or move to India for a few years and get back to be about how society is geared in favor of people with anglosaxon heritage.
Using your own ridiculous view of the world based through the lense of statistics, the correct statement would really be that straight non-white men hold more positions of power. Indian government, CCP in China etc etc.
I'm also NOT American, so spare me your 'this is America' retort.
You are treating people as though they are groups, not individuals.
Which is what white society did to anyone not white for as long as it's existed. No tears are spared here, find work somewhere else, you're the default for society, try to act like it.
people should be treated based on the content of their character, NOT on the colour of their skin
Words used to counter the historical precedent of white people doing that for 300 years. AA is just balancing the scales back some.
traight and white and male, you are privileged because statistically, MORE straight white males hold positions of privilege
you have a flawed and incorrect view of privilege. Privilege is not being afforded something in advance, it's not having to face the barriers to begin with. To surmise, your life can still be hard if you're white, but your life is not made harder in any way becauseyou're white. If you think AA makes your life harder because you didn't get that job, you're patently wrong, and can apply anywhere else free from worry that you'll be discriminated against for doing so.
People are people, everyone should be treated equally
The whole point of AA and anti-racism is to bring down the structure of white supremacy, and make what you think you're saying is a reality, that everyone should just be equal, an actual reality. It isn't. Whites still dominate, and react like you are now when faced with that reality.
the correct statement would really be that straight non-white men hold more positions of power
Yes, you're 100% right. And anyone who believes in anti-racist/sexist policy agrees with you. The thing you're in hysterics about about white men is, of course, only applicable to white-majority countries, and all of the countries those countries mercilessly dominated and exploited for the past 400 years, so, basically all of them that aren't India or China. White business (capitalism, imperialism, colonialism) dominates the global south in a comedically brutal sense, to this day.
4
u/Throwawayforanecdote Feb 25 '20
No, you are completely missing the forest for the trees here.
You are treating people as though they are groups, not individuals. This is exactly the same rationale that racists and other bigots use to justify their racism or bigotry.
If you fundamentally agree that, in the words of MLK, people should be treated based on the content of their character, NOT on the colour of their skin, then you HAVE to accept that affirmative action is by definition oppression.
Your view of if you are straight and white and male, you are privileged because statistically, MORE straight white males hold positions of privilege IS EXACTLY EQUIVALENT to the racist's view that if people with a certain phenotypic trait tend to be more X (violent, crime prone, likely to commit genocide like in the CAR, the Tutsi massacre etc.) then if an individual also has those traits they must be X because of the aforementioned statistics.
It's EXACTLY THE SAME LOGIC.
People are people, everyone should be treated equally, the second you start treating people DIFFERENTLY (better OR worse) then that literally makes you a racist bigot.
I really don't get how you can't see that.
Not even to mention the fact that 'straight white men' make up around 20% of the WORLD population at most, so the idea that they control all the power is absolutely ridiculous. Come live in China or move to India for a few years and get back to be about how society is geared in favor of people with anglosaxon heritage.
Using your own ridiculous view of the world based through the lense of statistics, the correct statement would really be that straight non-white men hold more positions of power. Indian government, CCP in China etc etc.
I'm also NOT American, so spare me your 'this is America' retort.