The Whiteness Forum

[Jhhnn]

You might be surprised to learn that there may be racism against blacks on the progressive left as well (specifically they assume blacks are cognitively inferior to themselves and dumb down their speech accordingly). This has recently been demonstrated with a peer reviewed paper coming out of Princeton and Yale.

Here are the highlights:




Do you adjust your speech based on your audience? I admit that I do and it is completely dishonest and says something pretty bad about me as a person. A hockey dad I know says it is his mission in life to use the same language and speak the same way no matter who his audience is. It is probably the correct and moral way to live your life but you have to be a damn saint to actually live by it.

http://www2.philly.com/columnists/y...lack-conversation-solomon-jones-20181204.html

https://psyarxiv.com/pv2ab/

Please. While white libs are often less than perfect we do not accept racism as a basic belief.

 

[pmv]

You might be surprised to learn that there may be racism against blacks on the progressive left as well (specifically they assume blacks are cognitively inferior to themselves and dumb down their speech accordingly). This has recently been demonstrated with a peer reviewed paper coming out of Princeton and Yale.

Do you adjust your speech based on your audience? I admit that I do and it is completely dishonest and says something pretty bad about me as a person. A hockey dad I know says it is his mission in life to use the same language and speak the same way no matter who his audience is. It is probably the correct and moral way to live your life but you have to be a damn saint to actually live by it.

http://www2.philly.com/columnists/y...lack-conversation-solomon-jones-20181204.html

https://psyarxiv.com/pv2ab/

Who would be surprised to find racism exists on 'the left'? 'The left' is a huge, and disparate, category. And 'racism' is only one issue among many. There are also, shock-horror, anti-racists who are sexist, or anti-sexists who are class-snobs, and class-warriors who are racist, etc etc. If everyone who was on 'the left' in one sense was consistently on-message across some dodgy laundry-list of supposed 'left beliefs', over all possible issues, the right would have been annihilated a long time ago.

And that's not even getting started on the idea that 'liberals' are synonymous with 'the left'. I still find that idea strange.

I'm not wading through that paper, maybe it's valid, maybe it isn't, can't really say without doing a lot of work I can't be arsed to do, but I'm a bit suspicious of quantitative social-science and social-psychology in general.

 

[zinfamous]

You might be surprised to learn that there may be racism against blacks on the progressive left as well (specifically they assume blacks are cognitively inferior to themselves and dumb down their speech accordingly). This has recently been demonstrated with a peer reviewed paper coming out of Princeton and Yale.

Here are the highlights:




Do you adjust your speech based on your audience? I admit that I do and it is completely dishonest and says something pretty bad about me as a person. A hockey dad I know says it is his mission in life to use the same language and speak the same way no matter who his audience is. It is probably the correct and moral way to live your life but you have to be a damn saint to actually live by it.

http://www2.philly.com/columnists/y...lack-conversation-solomon-jones-20181204.html

https://psyarxiv.com/pv2ab/

You know how I know that you aren't the same bshole that used to randomly PM me only a year ago? When did you become such a beta "TRS" Pepe-the-frog supporter?

 

[Jhhnn]

You know how I know that you aren't the same bshole that used to randomly PM me only a year ago? When did you become such a beta "TRS" Pepe-the-frog supporter?

You're the real racist!

Or something.

 

[obidamnkenobi]

Who would be surprised to find racism exists on 'the left'? 'The left' is a huge, and disparate, category. And 'racism' is only one issue among many. There are also, shock-horror, anti-racists who are sexist, or anti-sexists who are class-snobs, and class-warriors who are racist, etc etc. If everyone who was on 'the left' in one sense was consistently on-message across some dodgy laundry-list of supposed 'left beliefs', over all possible issues, the right would have been annihilated a long time ago.

And that's not even getting started on the idea that 'liberals' are synonymous with 'the left'. I still find that idea strange.

I'm not wading through that paper, maybe it's valid, maybe it isn't, can't really say without doing a lot of work I can't be arsed to do, but I'm a bit suspicious of quantitative social-science and social-psychology in general.

Isn't this the whole points of SJW stuff? To be aware of privilege and unconscious bias and this kind of behavior? Including how it affects everybody, even them most "lib" white people? And yeah this is interesting, and now that I know certainly something I will consider. You sure got me there.. But (usually) whenever this is pointed out people on the right have a fit and blow it out of proportions and claim this proves liberals say they own slaves or something.

So, uhm, what was bshole's point? Study finds all people have subconsouc bias in their behavior towards differnt kids of people; SJW proves to be necessary? Congrats in becoming woke I guess?? (the part about conservative people not doing this is obviously bullshit).

 

[pmv]

Isn't this the whole points of SJW stuff? To be aware of privilege and unconscious bias and this kind of behavior? Including how it affects everybody, even them most "lib" white people? And yeah this is interesting, and now that I know certainly something I will consider. You sure got me there.. But (usually) whenever this is pointed out people on the right have a fit and blow it out of proportions and claim this proves liberals say they own slaves or something.

So, uhm, what was bshole's point? Study finds all people have subconsouc bias in their behavior towards differnt kids of people; SJW proves to be necessary? Congrats in becoming woke I guess?? (the part about conservative people not doing this is obviously bullshit).

If I had more energy I'd read that paper in it's entirity, because it's a little tricky to disagree without properly reading something, and it's actually somewhat interesting (but I have other things to do!). But at a glance it seemed to be saying conservatives do it too, at least the data it presented seemed to show both groups change their language when talking to different races...but that the conservatives used more of what the study (questionably) defined as 'competence displaying' words for all audiences.

But I don't get a lot of this stuff in general, as so much of it seems to be based on trying to make strong quantitative objective claims while starting with subjective assumptions and definitions.

For example, one of the studies that paper refers to involved participants rating themselves from 1 ('extremely liberal') to 9 ('extremely conservative'). To me that makes as much sense as asking people to rate themselves from 1 ('extremely fat') to 9 ('extremely musical').

'Conservative' and 'Liberal' are not points on a one-dimensional scale, and they certainly aren't at extreme ends of that scale. They are two different (and rather fuzzy) philosophical concepts. Only the other day I read an article (that I found annoyingly elitist and snobbish) that was by a member of the Tory party who ran a 'liberal conservative' think tank.

The study also didn't seem to control for other factors - looking at US liberal and conservative politicians is hardly a randomly-selected group - that's probably an elite in class-terms anyway - are they controlling for class? Are they allowing for the fact that conservative and liberal politicians might be looking for different things when they speak to different race audiences (Republicans seem to have pretty much given up on black voters, hence all the voter-supression and gerrymandering)

And it seemed to depend on some sub-division between 'values based' and 'heirarchy based' conservative and liberal, and I didn't spot where those terms were defined (and I bet there are some more subjective judgements in there as well).

But it might have a valid point, it's obvious that politicians change their language according to the audience, to a certain degree that's just being polite (as long as you get it right!), and I doubt the idea that liberal politicians can be patronising or elitist would be news to anyone.

Edit - and yeah, this sort of analysis is central to 'SJW stuff'. Including the fact that it's very academy-based, that being one of the critisisms the left sometimes makes of said 'SJW stuff'. Politics is complicated and there aren't just two clearly-defined 'teams'.