Does anyone have a powerful redpill rebuttal to this image. I had it sent to me by a female liberal looney at college who called me a racist at a party for not believing in "white privilege".
>>72245731
http://everydayfeminism.com/2014/09/white-privilege-explained/
this is the full link
>>72245731
If you are aware enough to consider their view crazy you should be able to come up with counterarguments on your own. I won't do all your work for you but I'll give you a starting point: they define racism as something only white people are capable of.
>>72245731
>>72245795
The concept of White privelege is racist itself.
It is an idea dreamt up with the aims of influencing hiring practices based on the colour of ones skin.
By definition it is racist,
>>72245731
>when you see it in action
Hell of an argument there.
Ask this bitch how she feels about Asian privilege; statistically they make more than whites, have higher college acceptance rates, etc.
Ask her if she's ever met someone from another race she didn't like. Ask her to describe your white privilege and what you should do about it.
These faggots just regurgitate what they've read or been told. Keep asking why and they'll crumble pretty quick or start yelling.
White privilege does exist. So does black privilege, and womens privilege, and even muslim privilege. By virtue of the definition of privilege, everyone has some amount of it in their specific context.
The problem is that (dumb) people think the mere existence of privilege has any sort of meaning, and they ignore context of the society it is found in. They blather on about social justice but don't seem to realize that the numerical equality they seek (such as the wage gap, or whining that there isn't a 1:1 ratio of male and female CEOs, etc.) is not the kind of equality that women and minorities fought so hard to achieve in the 70s.
So the concept of "white privilege" exists (though it's more accurate to call it "class privilege" in most of the western world) but the way people are using it is complete bullshit.
>>72245731
There is no arguing with such people. It is impossible to prove, on either side, whether the failures of minorities are their own fault or the white man's fault or to what degree. The only arguments you could possibly put forth are racial statistics but they will either say the facts are that way due to racism or the facts are correct but white privilege still exists.
Either way, it will only cement her opinion that you are a racist and she will inform anyone willing to listen to her that you are a racist.
>>72246229
I know that Fin, I can handle my own. I just wanted to see if there was anything small I was missing that would really destroy her. e.g. infograph with overwhelming stats etc.
>>72246387
At least someone here is onto something.
>>72246762
Not really, as >>72246481
pointed out. They are essentially indoctrinated to view anyone who disagrees as a bad person and also to not listen to any bad people.
>>72245731
Of course white privilege exists. White people make the best societies and naturally are fluent in the social conventions and intricacies of navigating them. White privilege is fair because it's earned.
>>72246889
I think that really is the best counter argument. They claim that whites do better than blacks because of institutionalized racism, but that argument fails when you show that there exists a minority that does better than whites.
It simply wouldn't make sense to say that white institutions are racist and that is why asians do better than whites.
>>72246998
If anything though, there is less privilege to being white since you're forced to share your country with others who are never asked to check their privilege in the nations they come from.
>>72245731
It's a secular original sin for Marxists, a faith based system of subjugation nothing more
>>72246762
This might give you a hint at attacking the crux of their argument.
>>72245731
Send her back White Man's Burden by Kipling.
>>72246889
This should help anon:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GuTWMMpv4yk
>>72247533
>>72247279
>>72247263
>>72247074
>>72246388
Thanks you, Anons. I appreciate it. I'm at work now, but if I get a conversation going I'll post back here or start a new thread this evening.
>>72247802
Fool, don't you know that you can't win this battle?
Look at the image again: white privilege is ignorance; you're ignorant. It doesn't matter how good your infographics, arguments etc. are. The conclusion will be that you're ignorant because you're white.
>>72247802
>>72248179
Tintin is right anon. I've given you advice I have used in arguments myself and shut a bitch down, but just by challenging this ho's feelings you're persona non grata.
When people says you have white privilege, it means they believe in white supremacy and that you are a higher form of life than them and therefore naturally entitled to rule over them in absolutely every area of their lives.
>>72247802
The way I usually attack their argument is by breaking down the word "racism" into its components "race" being a categorical term that separates humans based off of genetic, geographic, and cultural differences and "ism" being a modifying suffix that implies a belief system. Therefore, racism means a belief system about about the separation of humans based on genetic, geographic, and cultural differences. That way they know how I define racism and why I disagree with their use of it.
I usually tell them that their definition doesn't make linguistic sense and that makes their argument disingenuous because it isn't arguing the term racism in the way most people use it.
>>72245731
easy
"for that image to be correct you have to assume there is something wrong with racism"
>>72245731
The only thing you should do is tell her it is your white privilege to fuck her in the pussy and if she says no then stop talking to her forever because you are wasting your time.
>>72245731
>ask her to tell you what privileges you have
>first get rid of any that don't apply to you personally by saying that you simply do not have that privilege
>she'll probably list off a lot of things like the colour of band-aids match your skin tone better, you don't have to worry about racial profiling
>typically these fall into 2 categories totally arbitrary things that don't actually oppress people (ex. bandaids), things that bigots do but that are not accepted by society in general (ie. racial profiling)
>basically figure out which bin to put each in and there are your standard arguments
>if she brings up something that's arbitrary like bandaids ask her how that legitimately holds POC back
>if she brings up something that bigots do ask her, "If you walked down the street and stopped random white people and asked them if X was ok, what do you think they'd say?" hopfully she'll realize that what ever X is, it is not accepted by society in general and therefore cannot be a privilege of being white in North American society
>somethings will fall outside these categories, but most fit nicely
>also argue with the crap definition of racism that they use. Basically, what the regressive left has done is take something (the concept of racism) that entire generations of North Americans have been taught was bad. Then they've changed the definition to suit their purposes and everyone is too afraid to say their wrong because everyone has be taught racism is bad, even though what constitutes racism has changed dramatically in their eyes
>finally make your own arguments, like if privilege theory is right you should be able to predict how "oppressed" groups will fair. For examples Jews are one of the most universally hated and systematically oppressed people ever, yet they are not considered poor or in need of help
This is a general guide but you really have to do your research and draw your own conclusions to make a good case
>>72245731
I'm a CIS white male.
I tell them I grew up poor on government benefits to a single mum, had a terrible life, had my brother taken away from my family by social services, nearly ended up in jail, had a constant uphill struggle my whole life just to achieve a relatively normal existence. And that's just the surface.
Then I ask them to show me where my white privilege disappeared all that time.
>>72245795
Good fucking lord. I thought I was actually going to see something smart.
Let's take the first statistic. Going to prison isn't a more or less "likely" or "unlikely" occurrence, but is the direct result of individual choices. I do not wake up on any given day with a certain chance of going to prison and a complementary chance of not going to prison. I do not know what the name of this fallacy is, but the comic is taking information collected about a class of people and is then talking as if going to prison was analogous to a throwing of the dice
The other fallacy embedded in the use of this statistic in order to "prove" the existence of the concept of white privilege is the attribution of an undemonstrated causative factor at play in the higher incarceration rate of black people. Namely, we are to believe that the only reason more of them end up in prison as opposed to white is that the system is somehow set up against them in a racist manner. This itself implies the demonstration of two components : (1) that the system is set up against them and (2) that it is so in a way that is explicitly racist. It could very well be that most of the black population is poor and that the system is set up against those people who are poor. Condition (1) would be satisfied but not condition (2).
The use of the second statistic also commits the exact same fallacy. It is, for instance, entire plausible that, of those people that have a criminal record, those that have prescription glasses are 10% more likely to get a job once outside the prison system that those that don't. Should we then conclude that there is systematic discrimination against those people who do not have prescription glasses, or should we rather substantiate this hypothesis with another kind of demonstration? In order words, the fact that there are statistical differences between categories does not imply that those differences are caused by the category difference itself.
>>72248179
If that's the case then just flip it on them. Say they are ignorant because they are not white. They either have to admit that calling someone ignorant is not an argument or have to accept that they are ignorant of your point of view and therefore can't possibly know that being a POC is harder than being white. There's no real way to get out of this because calling someone ignorant does not constitute a reasonable agrument.
>>72247533
Why do liberals look so lost in a debate that involves facts and logic?
>>72249479
Because they exist in a feedback loop on social media and western women put their feelings above all else. Then their pussy-whipped male counterparts shuck and jive and hope they can get a lackluster sympathy handjob from some bitch who thinks he's a pussy but likes the attention.
The problem is the men, not the women. The enable this bullshit.
>>72245731
Their ideologies have replaced their religion, but they can't let go of that original sin bullshit.
It just got a different name.
I hate those faggots so much, holy shit.
I would tell her i dont give a fuck what she thinks
>>72248889
excellent walk through, I will take that under advisement
>>72249225
Fantastic, I wasn't thinking of it in that way.
>>72249434
She is a self hating white...
>>72251136
You could mention poor whites and rich blacks, and how Affirmative Action favors blacks and women, when it should give them equal chances instead. A good egalitarian policy would be not to include pictures in CVs or to use codes instead of names, for instance, to avoid racial/sexual profiling.
Whether you're in favor of equality or not doesn't even matter. You're attacking her argument, not defending your position.
Just like a child that inherits his father's hard-earned money, there's literally nothing wrong with enjoying the white privilege our ancestors bled for.
Prove me wrong.
>>72245731
Ask her about slavs, or irish.
>>72246762
Whites do have privilege. Obviously. But they should, after all, the usa as we know it was founded by whites. In japan, theres japanese privilege. Nothing wrong with that.>>72251722
This
>>72245731
The basic idea behind this is that because EU/USA were / are dominant, we should strive to have every minority meet no struggle or trouble at all in their lives, and because they are minorities in a white culture, they WILL experience struggle. So our culture needs to accomodate them as much as possible.
Regarding minorities, the right of the minorities should be protected up to a certain degree. Some might suffer from feeling different from their peers, but you think the needs of the few do not outweigh the needs of the many. The needs of the many include freedom of speech and ideas, for whom a level of discomfort is worth experiencing.
Also, the needs of several categories of "few" are contradictory (see gay rights and muslim minorities). Meeting them all is impossible.
Checking privilege means seeing every other person you meet as a potential victim and poor downtrodden soul. You prefer to listen to those people themselves and what they have to tell you rather than another privileged white woman. Barring active threat coming from a state, minorities can speak up for themselves.
There is currentely no longer an active threat of different treatment from the state towards women or black people.
>>72245731
call her a racist
>White privilege does not exist
>But it does you just don't look hard enough
Not an argument
My thoughts are that there is nothing in the law giving white people some sort of special advantage or privilege. However, there are for non whites. Usually what you hear is anecdotal events which no one can consistently prove, as a white person could relate the same thing in reverse. The only thing provably set in stone are special advantages for various minority groups.
>>72245731
there is no rebuttal
Whites really are better than everyone else, and you have the privilege of being born White.
If it makes you feel any better, call it "White Advantage" instead of "White Privilege".
>White men have so much privilege
>Meanwhile, 7/10 people who commit suicide are white males.
>>72251136
>She is a self hating white...
Ask her if she believes in Uncle Toms, you know for blacks they have uncle toms, for Natives, they have Uncle Tomahawks. A self hating person that is a traitor to their own race and puts the needs of those that do not care about her on a pedestal.
Also the creator of that comic is officially mental ill and admits so. She couldn't handle any criticism and went into "hiding" to collect sympathy from naive people. Also Everyday Feminism has the same scientific credibility as Answers In Genesis
What rebuttal do you need? It's the typical no substance leftist argument "You are just ignorant!" If you can't properly explain a concept than it is likely bullshit or is simply what you are told to believe.
If it is all around is and is "the world" than point to fucking anything.
>>72254551
All around us*
>>72248479
To be honest, etymology doesn't always have a meaningful bearing on what the definition of a word 'should' mean. For example take the word 'rape'. In Serbo Croat this is 'Sila' which is from the same root as the Russian 'Sila' as in 'sila boga' meaning 'power of god'. The original root meant 'force, power' but the eventual Russian meaning has nothing to do with sex or assault but with the power of the almighty. Similarly, in French it it 'viol' which is obviously similar to 'violate' but in English, if you say someone violated your rights, it doesn't necessary have anything to do with sex or assault. The word 'rape' come from the Latin meaning to 'abduct', a word which does not specify sexual assault, which it's English descendent definitely does.
By your logic a French feminist could claim that looking at her funny constituted rape by falling back on the vaguer concept of 'violation', and claim this had moral relevance.
>>72245731
white privilege is getting a job and knowing it wasn't because they needed somebody of your race to fill a quota.
we shouldn't hold out on the other races, they should get the full satisfaction of their achievements as well.
>>72245795
EZ REBUTTALS
1: higher porcentage of black criminals is related to higher porcentage of black people inside higher crime areas. It's correlation:
>dangerous areas unfortunately have more black people, so they get arrested more often.
2.White men get 5% more chance to get hired despite having a criminal record, well, these doesn't mean shit, becuase people get hired because of their abilities not because they are "not criminals" which seems like the only thing you can say about some black people.
>If I need to hire an specialist I won't care if he is black or not, this relates to the 1st point, because the rate of black men dropout from school is higher, so they don't have complete education.
3.Major news focus on interracial homicides: Well NO SHIT they crave for spectacle and more often than not, interracial crime will be more prone to get more VIEWS,
>Major News Outlets ONLY CARE ABOUT RATINGS.
4. White privilege is the privilege to be ignorant of the world around us...So I should pay with my peace of mind because MY FUCKING PARENTS WORKED SO HARD TO GET ME THE LIFE THEY COULDNT GET.
>JesusChrist, I understand benevolence, but this is too much of a white guilt, you are not guilty for the world around you.
Which is more racist tho, White people believe themselve so superior that they FEEL THEY NEED TO BE HANDICAPED SO THAT THE REST CAN COMPETE. HAHAHA
Get a hold of yourself. this double racism will be a field of study in the future, god have mercy.
>5.EDUCATE YOURSELF
No shit if people actually educate themselves instead of reading shitty comics we wouldn't have this problem.
>>72254969
You are arguing something else entirely from what I am. You are drawing things from other languages. My argument was made from within the English language. Of course if you start looking at other languages and the cross-references of them etymology won't make sense because when cultures took loan words from other languages, or incorporated foreign words into their language, they wanted a word that would make sense for their language with no regard for the origin of the word.
However, if you are going to argue definitions and etymology of English words, then you should base it off of English.
Lastly, my point still stands perfectly well because they are still being disingenuous by redefining a word in a way that the common person, or any person not in sociology, would not agree with.
Not sure if you were disagreeing with my point, but I thought I would clarify why I am right either way.
>>72256320
Well, you are right. Only my French example would be relevant, if we were speaking French. The point was that rather than argue that your definition of racism was preferable to hers from an etymological point of view, that it was preferable from a logical and moral point of view.
If we take the term 'racism' to mean 'a grouping of people according to the colour of their skin, making [often negative] generalisations about that group which denies any individual within that group the right to be judged on his or her individual merits' then he implication that all whites are racist or te only people capable of being racist is itself racist, and immoral because to that denial of individual rights. And why is it ok to treat whites so? Because they are racist [by your definition]. So it's a self-contradictory and circular argument.
In being included in a group with negative connotations because others in that group behave badly, she is not only being racist, she is demonstrating that quality of racism that is exactly makes it immoral.
>>72257715
*in including others in a group...
>>72245731
Tell her to prove white privilege exists and when she can't come up with any tangible points that can be proven, point out minority privilege with stuff like hiring quotas and affirmative action.
Or just kill her for being retarded. Your choice.
>>72246343
Racism=prejudice+power, shitlord. Can't argue with that equation.
>>72245731
That maymay doesn't take step 1 toward defining "white privilege" except that it's some form of apparition that you can't really see until you "believe".
It creates a named boogey-man, out of nothing, and expects us to somehow act on it.
>>72258041
>Racism=prejudice+power, shitlord. Can't argue with that equation.
I say, Racism=peanut butter+chocolate. Prove me wrong, faggot.
>>72258548
> trying to use denotation when arguing against the obviously best way to define racism
I bet you're a white male. But your argument is irrefutable unfortunately, I'm afraid Reese's is rayciss.
>>72258900
>I bet you're a white male.
what difference would it make?
niggers are more racist than humans by far.
>>72258041
That definition is too ambiguous and the power bit just seems arbitrary, you can be racist without power.
