Sig Ep Out at Ole Miss

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

No. I used those two examples because they are current and well-known. There are plenty of others, spanning many states, and pretending it's a Florida problem of some sort is really burying your head in the sand.

Here's a good roundup for your perusal:
http://www.theroot.com/photos/2013/0...d_stories.html

I'm not looking to debate the merits of any particular case mentioned, I'm just making the point that racism still has life-and-death consequences in these United States, whether you see it or not (and if you pass through life as a white person, you don't see it the way people of color do).

Right, that's why I want people to see these issues beyond "chapter operations" and beyond "hazing." Pretending as though the larger problem is "chapter operations" or "hazing" (when applicable) is what keeps this stuff going. People are unable to see the larger themes because they are buried in certain details. That reminds me of that thread from a few months ago in which I was a bit shocked that GCers were talking for pages about everything except for what I considered to be the main theme.

As an aside, there are people such as myself who frown at the phrase "people of color" because it implies that whiteness is race neutral enough that white people are void of skin color. I've never met a (literally) transparent white person. Therefore, all humans are people of color. But my opinion doesn't make the world go around.

[WhiteRose1912]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

As an aside, there are people such as myself who frown at the phrase "people of color" because it implies that whiteness is race neutral enough that white people are void of skin color. I've never met a (literally) transparent white person. Therefore, all humans are people of color. But my opinion doesn't make the world go around.

Doesn't saying "non-white" also have negative connotations (implying that they lack white skin)? I'm curious what term you prefer when discussing people who don't have white privilege.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by WhiteRose1912

Doesn't saying "non-white" also have negative connotations (implying that they lack white skin)? I'm curious what term you prefer when discussing people who don't have white privilege.

It can have negative connotations since non-white only works if the baseline category is being white. That happens for some research and discussions of power dynamics, for example. For me it matters what is attempting to be conveyed.

I use "racial and ethnic minorities" which is about the wide range of racial and ethnic groups at the lower social power spectrum. People of the white diaspora would be racial and ethnic majorities (that includes inequality and disparity among ethnic groups within the white diaspora).

/DrPhil + WhiteRose1912 = thread hijack

[WhiteRose1912]

Interesting, thank you.

Originally Posted by DrPhil

/DrPhil + WhiteRose1912 = thread hijack