Why am i not seeing people argue about how this explanation is similar to Karl Marx explanation about privileges!!! Structural traditions that make people to segreggate whith all the banks debt
It's a point that's not even backed by citations. Even the definition she gave. Not only was it uncited, but it didn't even match with Merriam-Webster. For example, the dictionary doesn't restrict the definition to a "dominant" group in particular, but to any group in general.
Unequities have always existed and always will... but amongst regular folks are always improving, its the ruling elite you can peddle your privilege, its division tactic
@@ApparitionOO money always passes from poor to rich one way or another. Trick is to figure out how to have it passed to you because of value you add and what you do with it
Suppose Allyship comes from siemense energy who called me for intreview. Thought it was true intreview to find out they were only calling to take advantage of my success so pitty
Pease, Bob. Undoing privilege: Unearned advantage and systemic injustice in an unequal world. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2021. McIntosh, Peggy. "Real-izing personal and systemic privilege: Reflection becoming action." Everyday white people confront racial and social injustice. Routledge, 2015. 13-24. Jennings, Gretchen, and Joanne Jones-Rizzi. "Museums, white privilege, and diversity: A systemic perspective." Dimensions 18.5 (2017): 66-67. Shadbolt, Carole. "The many faces of systemic oppression, power, and privilege: The necessity of self-examination." Transactional Analysis Journal 52.3 (2022): 259-273.
I highly recommend that everyone look up 'Learned Helplessness' and how this idea of Privilege contributes to division of sex, color, race, and religion.
I looked up "learned helplessness" on Wikipedia. More than 2,000 words. "Privilege" was never mentioned. It seems that at least one link is missing in your logic. However: There is overwhelming evidence that diversity is beneficial to life, especially when environmental conditions change. You can look at nature as a whole, an ecosystem, the human body, nutrition, societies, corporations, an economy (greed shapes the minds of market participants in a single direction - until a crisis rips many things brutally apart), human warfare (it's called "combined arms" - based on the observation that mixing different types of weapons often produces better results on the battlefield). Never in the history of human mankind, we have seen that much speed and change. It is in our best interest as humans to learn value and celebrate diversity and raise our awareness of where we are hindering it. This is one of the best survival strategies for humanity - and a way to enjoy life: "Variety is the spice of life." - William Cowper.
Two concepts that address different aspects of human experience: Learned Helplessness focuses on individual agency and psychological responses, while privilege, as defined by Peggy McIntosh, focuses on systemic inequalities and social dynamics. So, if we describe society as a 400m hurdles race, if no privileges existed, everybody would start at the beginning of the track. But the truth is that society is a system that promotes unearned advantages to a group and sets their starting point closer to the finishing line. They will get to the goal earlier than the other ones, no matter how much effort the ones that start at meter 0 put.
It’s by choice. I chose to stop going to school and working so I could take care of my children when they are really little. I deliberately chose a husband who would support me. I will go back to work when I’m older.
Nobody is born equal. Some people are born with great singing talent, or are beautiful, or are capable of physical feats few others human could even attempt. These people tend to enjoy success and fame in ways other will never know. So? Should I expect the black superstar athlete to feel bad because of his success when there are no Asian female superstars of equal caliber in his sport? What about the black female singer who becomes the superstar, while less talented Latino women languish? The whole argument is stupid beyond belief and completely ignores the idea of natural talent as a factor in success. Life is not fair. Some people get unfair advantages at birth, or various other points in time. You cannot bring everybody up to the same level of success. You can only bring everybody down to the same level of mediocrity. Do you really want to live in a society of only the mediocre? No great art, music, films, athletes, to inspire us as a species to greatness? I am an ally. An ally to the human spirit of striving for greatness. I will never be an ally to the mediocrity you are promoting.
I'm not sure how you jumped from atheliticism and singing talent to the ability to discriminate against people based on their gender, sexuality, race, class, ability, etc. Atheliticsm and talent are completely different from those others things; the main difference is that athleitcism and talent are things that you can grow, change, and exercise. I doubt that singers like Whitney Houston or athletes like Serena Williams simply succeeded because of natural born talent and not because of the work they put into those skills. Both of these Black women worked their butts of to get to where they are, but of course they're going to be reduced to being "born with talent"; I mean, often times, Serena Williams is given the class stereotype of the angry Black women. Allyson Felix was demeaned by Nike because of her pregnancy, as if Black women don't experience other discrimination when it comes to their pregnancy/birthing mortality rates. Anyways, on the other hand, one can not simply change their race, their sexuality, or their ability like one can train their skills. Even someone who is a mediocre singer can become an amazing singer with practice and training. I can't just randomly become a white man with practice and training, lol, I don't identify that way and can not change my race (not that I would want to change it). Then, to assume that people who do not share the priviledges of others as mediocre is pretty weird, especially since wealthy white cis straight men tend to garner the most priviledge for no reason other than being wealthy white cis straight men (none of which are talents or skills). You can strive for greatness regardless of how you are born, but who you are born as and how you identify makes the journery harder. Being disabled, being a person of color, being a women, being transgender, being part of the LGBTQ+ community, being indigenous, and being in a lower socio-economic class do not make you mediocre, but it sure can make your life harder. Young girls go out to college, in hopes to peacefully recieve a degree and succeed in their fields of interest, but are sexually assaulted and/or raped by male students, and no justice is brought to them, causing severe trauma and set backs. Black women want to become leaders in fields such as STEM but for years have been show and have been seen as people who can not do it. For example, the recent situation with Blizzard. Blizzard is a gaming company, and game development is male dominated, not cause women can't code and work on games, but because for no reason of than being men, men are seen as more logical and technilogically capable. Women who worked for Blizzard were sexually harassed on a day to day basis because many man, notice how I didn't say all men, see women as play-things, less than, individuals who are not capable as sharing the same skills and intelligence as them. Disabled people have constantly tried to show again and again that they are capable of greatness but they're shut down and considered "less intelligent, less capable, and less deserving of life and consideration" simply because of their disability. So even if people aren't "born equal", no one deserves to be discriminated against or be considered less deserving of basic respect, representation, and consideration because of the way they're born.
Sorry for the whole essay, but it had to be said. I'm honeslty tired of seeing comments like yours that deny the experiences of marganlizied communities. You can't deny the suffering and inequality that people experience on a day to day basis. Also, can't believe I didn't mention police brutality against Black people. Do we deserve to be shot at a higher rate, despite not committing a crime, because of our supposed mediocrity?
@@kimbyb3764 When I talk about "mediocrity", I am specifically talking about the socioeconomic and creative mediocrity that is the only possible result of the Marxist ideas underpinning all flavors of woke ideology. The end game is not "tolerance". The end game of "equity" is the end of all excellence, and the forcing of sameness on all people of all varieties -- much the same as the factory perfect reproducibility of fast-food burgers. Eat one type and you've experienced all that item will ever have to offer, no matter how many times you sample it. No life, no creativity -- just endless sameness forever. If variety is the spice of life, then Communism is surely the blandest of all possible ideologies.
@@kimbyb3764 Talent is inherent. Like with other privileges, a lack of talent shouldn't be used as an excuse for one's failures. You even gave examples of black women being successful with enough work. They're women who did not let their lack of privilege stop them from being successful. It's also unclear why you're talking about discrimination? That wasn't what Half Life was arguing for. If I understood him correctly, he said that privilege should be no excuse for being mediocre. Also that it's impossible to completely get rid of privilege ("Life is not fair"; "you cannot bring everyone to the same level of success"), which is correct. So you can either complain about others having more privilege than you (while using that privilege as an excuse for personal failures), or you can learn to be successful anyways with smart/hard work (which everyone is capable of doing). If you really want to see an example of racism, then read about the bigotry of low expectations. For example, having low expectations of success for POC merely due to them being POC.
race and gender are not talents. It is fine to hold consistent standards that might exclude some women from fields such as law enforcement and the armed forces, because those jobs require a high level of physical prowess (that fewer women can attain). It is NOT okay to simply say that women cannot apply or try, because gender alone doesn't make someone more or less qualified (the physical results of their gender might). Race has absolutely NO effect on a person's qualifications. It's an arbitrary thing that is socially constructed. You may think it is justified to say that since black people are generally less well educated, it's okay to discriminate. However, just because there are structural barriers to education for certain races in this country doesn't mean it is justified to use race as a factor in hiring or promoting. This also applies to denying people housing or jobs because they speak AAVE and you think that that sounds "uneducated". So this has nothing to do with the natural talents people are born with. Those still count and make individuals different and worth interviewing and talking about; however, race and gender should not be used to assume talent!
Grossly over simplified. there are factors to consider before drawing a conclusion. empIrical evidence is available but often ignored if it does not fit a particular narrative.
If everyone was equal on the study, why didn’t they just put the things that have been known to get callbacks from those companies on their resumes? Resumes are very boring for a manager to go through and if you put a bunch of unrelated information like gender and sexuality on the resume; you will be less likely to be called in. The bottom line for a company is to hire qualified and knowledgeable employees based on that specific job, but not every company sees personal attributes like race and orientation as useful factors in the workplace. So maybe just keep those things to yourself. As for the names; most big businesses HR people aren’t even looking at the names. Think about it; they are going through thousands of applications a day, do you really think they care at all about your name? Not really, they are looking for qualifications as the most important bottom line. If you disagree with these points; you should know that they came from a Harvard trained professor in business. So maybe focus on experience and skill over names and orientation when applying for a job.
I also found the holiday part of this video quite odd. Of course countries that have a rich history with a certain religion will accommodate a holiday (Christmas) over other religious holidays that have not been part of the culture in meaningful ways. If i go to Saudi Arabia for work I bet you they wont give me paid vacations for Christmas, but sure will for Muslim Holidays, and thats ok and completely understandable.
I'm not sure if you've looked into these studies since you posted your comment, but the point of them being the exact same apart from information which identifies them as part of a traditionally marginalized community is to study the effects of implicit bias! It's not typically at the forefront of our minds but it still shapes how we perceive others.
The world is what it is. People will always have opinions about others, positive or negative. Being sensitive and constantly addressing this 'problem' isn't going to make it go away. In fact, it won't get any of you very far. I believe some groups are superior to others. You can think whatever the fuck you want. If you want me to respect your views, you must understand that it is hypocritical not to respect mine too.
I mean, there's gotta be a reason that everyone prefers to hire straight white christian men. They must be pretty awesome at doing a litany of jobs. This was real confidence booster, thanks.
WAIT UNTIL YOUR INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS ARE PRIVILEGES.... THAT IS WHERE THEY ARE GOING WITH ALL OF THIS, FOLKS ARE JUST EMOTIONALLY MANIPULATED IN THE PROCESS AND DIVIDED, STAY UNITED! WE ARE STRONG
Dude wait a minute do you think that individual rights apply to everyone? One hundred years ago you could say the same thing even while you had slavery… its total nonsense you dont see that you already lack individual rights
Dude wait a minute do you think that individual rights apply to everyone? One hundred years ago you could say the same thing even while you had slavery… its total nonsense you dont see that you already lack individual rights
EXCELLENT bestWISHES verySIMPLEfor ALL SPREADthe WORD DO YOUR SHARETELL YOUR FRIENDS PLEASEHELP YESoursons future POTUS sufferedtargeted world dramastage meFIRED jobsBLOCKED bigshock forALL,Shilpi ingoodrelationship seekingSUITABLEbridefor Kaviraj
