Captain Marvel: The MCU's First Failure?

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

- The only de jure discrimination I've seen does not favor white people or men. Considering whiteness normal doesn't seem to have hurt Asians any. Any male privilege does not seem to extend to the justice system, longevity, or college enrollment.

- If one assumes that any statistical difference must be the result of prejudice, those things would seem awkward to explain. If one thinks only the statistical differences that might justify the discrimination you prefer are valid, I think one might want to take a long, hard look at oneself. Anyone determined enough to be racist or sexist can find something that justifies it to themselves, after all. Average IQ scores. Criminal statistics. Any number of social measurements, for that matter.

- My method is to not treat people by their race or sex (except for dating, medical reasons, whatnot). It has the advantage of letting people sort themselves out by their own merits.

- And if the purpose of racial and sexual discrimination is to reduce the effects of current discrimination, why isn't there a big push toward hiring, promoting, and paying by metrics? Reduce things to numbers or explain why the numbers don't work, and then if there are still separate outcomes, tackle find the real reasons.

- What do Asians have to do with anything? Because they are a minority, thus that opposite whiteness equals an overt discrimination dynamic? That's not at all what the concept of white privilege has suggested. And as far as male privilege, Brock Turner was an infamous case as far as being white and male in his equital. In the justice system, it's been noted that in matters such as paternity cases the mother is often favored. I've seen feminists frame this as an issue, and it's not as if it escapes patriarchy theory.

- Prejudice isn't the exclusive issue as far as social issues are concerned. A lot if not most of the issues are concerned with the conditions of collectives, either by their own subconservative culture, or just identity as is the case with overt prejudice matters like discriminant police shootings. Yes, Asians aren't talked about that much with regard to their condition on a collective level. Most I've heard about them on a contemporary level is interpersonal [generalizations] concerning martial arts, math excellence, and assumed nationality. And that's something people from western european background don't really have to deal with, thus "white privilege."

- And it's great if you treat them like people. The effort of these interest groups isn't to make you yourself for instance treat them special. But it is beyond you and your personal treatment of them. It's not a finger being pointed at you because you're white, and you're not expected to fix it or be a shining SJW beacon.

- With your last paragraph, I'm not sure what you mean. There are numbers. There are measures to enforce more equalized outcome even. Problems of intersectionality tend to make for a more complicated framework. And we're dealing with an intended free market. Regulation in general is fought against as is. This last paragraph of yours is kind of the heart of the condition dilemma that I'm talking about. It doesn't have to do with discrimination being the holy devil of social issues. It's marginalization based on for instance whites being more familiar and comfortable with whites often enough so that standards are suggestively in place to benefit them more often than not. Not in every single case, and not about putting a spotlight on you or other white people.

[clearspira]

To a much lesser extent, she also came and and said that she wants people to donate tickets for ''underprivileged'' girls to go and see the film. Which 1) Annoyed people because, y'know, there are ''underprivileged'' boys that can't see the film either

Annoyed "people"? Either source these people or admit you are the one who is annoyed, coward.

1) Can the potty mouth. It says more about your mentality than it does about mine, son.
2) Go onto Youtube and find one of the many high level creators that are talking about it and have comment sections full of agreeing voices. I'll give you one to start your journey with: ComicArtistProSecrets. 107 K subs. You're welcome.

So, the annoyed people you are invoking is the same youtube comment section rabble whose openly hateful tirades you dismiss as irrelevant to your side?

Their money is as good as everyone else's. So is their vote for that matter.

[clearspira]

Ignorance certainly helps it.

And yet you do not feel like alleviating me of that ignorance. Is my privilege a bit like God in that I cannot see it, hear it, or know its there but I should just have faith that it does?

[Makeshift Python]

Ignorance certainly helps it.

And yet you do not feel like alleviating me of that ignorance. Is my privilege a bit like God in that I cannot see it, hear it, or know its there but I should just have faith that it does?

I feel it’s been explained pretty well on this thread yet someone like Admiral X would rather plug their ears and yell “discrimination is discrimination” as if there’s no gray area, it’s only binary.

But if you want me to put it simply: White privilege isn’t about having an easy life altogether because of your skin, it’s about when a white man and a black man are seen on the street after a robbery occurred nearby but the police decide to stop the black man because they think he looks suspicious. It doesn’t even have to be because those police are racist, it’s just something ingrained in them that they’re unaware of, even if they’re black themselves.

That’s why we have affirmative action, because there are employers that wouldn’t be aware that they’re only hiring white people. Not always because they’re racist, but because they’re looking for someone like them and they sometimes don’t see themselves in a black person. It’s unforunate, but true. It’s something we as a society need to get past before we do away with such programs. It’s an ideal I hope we achieve like in Star Trek.

If that doesn’t convince you, I really do not know how else to elaborate on that.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Does affirmative action stem from employment hurdles? I follow obviously your line of reasoning in that post, but as far as entry into college, that's quite a disconnect for such a policy for college admittance.

Also, while I don't think there's the biggest of separations as the ocean between common languages, American white privilege is probably distinct from British white privilege in detail.

[Darth Wedgius]

- The only de jure discrimination I've seen does not favor white people or men. Considering whiteness normal doesn't seem to have hurt Asians any. Any male privilege does not seem to extend to the justice system, longevity, or college enrollment.

- If one assumes that any statistical difference must be the result of prejudice, those things would seem awkward to explain. If one thinks only the statistical differences that might justify the discrimination you prefer are valid, I think one might want to take a long, hard look at oneself. Anyone determined enough to be racist or sexist can find something that justifies it to themselves, after all. Average IQ scores. Criminal statistics. Any number of social measurements, for that matter.

- My method is to not treat people by their race or sex (except for dating, medical reasons, whatnot). It has the advantage of letting people sort themselves out by their own merits.

- And if the purpose of racial and sexual discrimination is to reduce the effects of current discrimination, why isn't there a big push toward hiring, promoting, and paying by metrics? Reduce things to numbers or explain why the numbers don't work, and then if there are still separate outcomes, tackle find the real reasons.

- What do Asians have to do with anything? Because they are a minority, thus that opposite whiteness equals an overt discrimination dynamic? That's not at all what the concept of white privilege has suggested. And as far as male privilege, Brock Turner was an infamous case as far as being white and male in his equital. In the justice system, it's been noted that in matters such as paternity cases the mother is often favored. I've seen feminists frame this as an issue, and it's not as if it escapes patriarchy theory.

- Prejudice isn't the exclusive issue as far as social issues are concerned. A lot if not most of the issues are concerned with the conditions of collectives, either by their own subconservative culture, or just identity as is the case with overt prejudice matters like discriminant police shootings. Yes, Asians aren't talked about that much with regard to their condition on a collective level. Most I've heard about them on a contemporary level is interpersonal [generalizations] concerning martial arts, math excellence, and assumed nationality. And that's something people from western european background don't really have to deal with, thus "white privilege."

- And it's great if you treat them like people. The effort of these interest groups isn't to make you yourself for instance treat them special. But it is beyond you and your personal treatment of them. It's not a finger being pointed at you because you're white, and you're not expected to fix it or be a shining SJW beacon.

- With your last paragraph, I'm not sure what you mean. There are numbers. There are measures to enforce more equalized outcome even. Problems of intersectionality tend to make for a more complicated framework. And we're dealing with an intended free market. Regulation in general is fought against as is. This last paragraph of yours is kind of the heart of the condition dilemma that I'm talking about. It doesn't have to do with discrimination being the holy devil of social issues. It's marginalization based on for instance whites being more familiar and comfortable with whites often enough so that standards are suggestively in place to benefit them more often than not. Not in every single case, and not about putting a spotlight on you or other white people.

I think English may not be your first language. If English is your first language, maybe for some reason you have some trouble understanding me. Either way, I'll try to make things very simple for you.

I brought up Asians because Asians, on average, do better than whites in the U.S. Clearly a broad prejudice against non-white people is not responsible for that. Not all group outcomes between ethnicities are different due to prejudice. Nor is prejudice against non-whites a barrier to better average success than whites have.

Please let me know that you understand those two points. If you don't understand them, maybe we can exchange private messages until you understand what I am saying.

I hope you understand that men being convicted more often and sentenced to longer sentences on average is not refuted by examples of where that doesn't happen. An elementary understanding of statistics is needed to comprehend this; if you don't have an elementary understanding of statistics, please let me know that. I'll block you, but it won't be with any malice.

I was holding my treatment of people up as an example of what I think is the best approach of how to treat people.

You seem to think that white people don't have to deal with stereotypes about white people. Please let me know if that is indeed a contention of yours.

My last point was that if getting over prejudice affecting economic conditions is really important to identitarians, we can focus on getting hiring, promotion, and payments to be done by metrics, that is objectively measurable conditions, rather than by personal feelings. That should eliminate prejudice as possible influences, without treating anyone special by sex or skin color. And that identitarians do not push for that, but rather for equality of outcome.

I don't know how to make that last point simpler for you. If you still don't understand what I mean there, then please let me know that, and I'll stop responding to you in that area except for a boilerplate statement saying that you have acknowledged you don't understand it.

[Darth Wedgius]

Ignorance certainly helps it.

And yet you do not feel like alleviating me of that ignorance. Is my privilege a bit like God in that I cannot see it, hear it, or know its there but I should just have faith that it does?

I feel it’s been explained pretty well on this thread yet someone like Admiral X would rather plug their ears and yell “discrimination is discrimination” as if there’s no gray area, it’s only binary.

But if you want me to put it simply: White privilege isn’t about having an easy life altogether because of your skin, it’s about when a white man and a black man are seen on the street after a robbery occurred nearby but the police decide to stop the black man because they think he looks suspicious. It doesn’t even have to be because those police are racist, it’s just something ingrained in them that they’re unaware of, even if they’re black themselves.

That’s why we have affirmative action, because there are employers that wouldn’t be aware that they’re only hiring white people. Not always because they’re racist, but because they’re looking for someone like them and they sometimes don’t see themselves in a black person. It’s unforunate, but true. It’s something we as a society need to get past before we do away with such programs. It’s an ideal I hope we achieve like in Star Trek.

If that doesn’t convince you, I really do not know how else to elaborate on that.

And yet, Asians are doing very well economically in the U.S. If people are only hiring people like them, how did that happen? Are Asians working only for Asians?

Men are treated worse by the criminal justice system than women are. By your logic, women have female privilege.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

- The only de jure discrimination I've seen does not favor white people or men. Considering whiteness normal doesn't seem to have hurt Asians any. Any male privilege does not seem to extend to the justice system, longevity, or college enrollment.

- If one assumes that any statistical difference must be the result of prejudice, those things would seem awkward to explain. If one thinks only the statistical differences that might justify the discrimination you prefer are valid, I think one might want to take a long, hard look at oneself. Anyone determined enough to be racist or sexist can find something that justifies it to themselves, after all. Average IQ scores. Criminal statistics. Any number of social measurements, for that matter.

- My method is to not treat people by their race or sex (except for dating, medical reasons, whatnot). It has the advantage of letting people sort themselves out by their own merits.

- And if the purpose of racial and sexual discrimination is to reduce the effects of current discrimination, why isn't there a big push toward hiring, promoting, and paying by metrics? Reduce things to numbers or explain why the numbers don't work, and then if there are still separate outcomes, tackle find the real reasons.

- What do Asians have to do with anything? Because they are a minority, thus that opposite whiteness equals an overt discrimination dynamic? That's not at all what the concept of white privilege has suggested. And as far as male privilege, Brock Turner was an infamous case as far as being white and male in his equital. In the justice system, it's been noted that in matters such as paternity cases the mother is often favored. I've seen feminists frame this as an issue, and it's not as if it escapes patriarchy theory.

- Prejudice isn't the exclusive issue as far as social issues are concerned. A lot if not most of the issues are concerned with the conditions of collectives, either by their own subconservative culture, or just identity as is the case with overt prejudice matters like discriminant police shootings. Yes, Asians aren't talked about that much with regard to their condition on a collective level. Most I've heard about them on a contemporary level is interpersonal [generalizations] concerning martial arts, math excellence, and assumed nationality. And that's something people from western european background don't really have to deal with, thus "white privilege."

- And it's great if you treat them like people. The effort of these interest groups isn't to make you yourself for instance treat them special. But it is beyond you and your personal treatment of them. It's not a finger being pointed at you because you're white, and you're not expected to fix it or be a shining SJW beacon.

- With your last paragraph, I'm not sure what you mean. There are numbers. There are measures to enforce more equalized outcome even. Problems of intersectionality tend to make for a more complicated framework. And we're dealing with an intended free market. Regulation in general is fought against as is. This last paragraph of yours is kind of the heart of the condition dilemma that I'm talking about. It doesn't have to do with discrimination being the holy devil of social issues. It's marginalization based on for instance whites being more familiar and comfortable with whites often enough so that standards are suggestively in place to benefit them more often than not. Not in every single case, and not about putting a spotlight on you or other white people.

I think English may not be your first language. If English is your first language, maybe for some reason you have some trouble understanding me. Either way, I'll try to make things very simple for you.

I brought up Asians because Asians, on average, do better than whites in the U.S. Clearly a broad prejudice against non-white people is not responsible for that. Not all group outcomes between ethnicities are different due to prejudice. Nor is prejudice against non-whites a barrier to better average success than whites have.

This and everything else you said disregards what I said. I'll just leave it at that.

[Darth Wedgius]

This and everything else you said disregards what I said. I'll just leave it at that.

Oddly enough, I don't see that. And I often think I see you ignoring what I said in your replies, and going off on a tangent. I've been giving you the benefit of the doubt so far, though.

[Admiral X]

I feel it’s been explained pretty well on this thread yet someone like Admiral X would rather plug their ears and yell “discrimination is discrimination” as if there’s no gray area, it’s only binary.

Y'all would be the ones plugging your ears. For all its protests otherwise, the regressive left really isn't all that different from the regressive right. They ignore facts and demonize science when they don't conform to their ideological outlook and do their level best to destroy anyone who opposes them. And then there's that smug sense of superiority that their way is the only right one, which makes them no different from the people who kidnapped Native children and sent them off to boarding schools to "civilize" them and actually thought they were doing them a favor. And before you try to claim the regressive left isn't like that, I've seen the way it treats women and minorities who don't toe the line. This is part of why I call them regressive.