Huffpost black voices:North Korea Proves White Male Privilege Is Not Universal

[Shiranu]

Aristocracy is the word you are looking for.

No, it's not. The average white male is not part of the aristocracy but he is granted certain privileges in society that an average minority race race or woman would not get. But again, that is not the only factor of if you are privileged or not, hence the reason I said it is a multitude of factors.

[mauricio]

No, it's not. The average white male is not part of the aristocracy but he is granted certain privileges in society that an average minority race race or woman would not get. But again, that is not the only factor of if you are privileged or not, hence the reason I said it is a multitude of factors.

In your exchange with hydra you were talking about the minority on which the majority of power is concentrated this is called the aristocracy which is synonymous of elite the word you used. Agreed with your second sentence.

[Shiranu]

In your exchange with hydra you were talking about the minority on which the majority of power is concentrated this is called the aristocracy.

Oh okay, I thought you meant the over-arching field of privilege vs non-privilege.

[mauricio]

No, it's not. The average white male is not part of the aristocracy but he is granted certain privileges in society that an average minority race race or woman would not get. But again, that is not the only factor of if you are privileged or not, hence the reason I said it is a multitude of factors.

Btw women are also granted privileges males do not get and both get different social pressures and punishments when they fail to behave inside their gender role. Whether you are privileged or not by your gender depends of how well does the gender role fits you.

[Shiranu]

Btw women are also granted privileges males do not get and both get different social pressures and punishments when they fail to behave inside their gender role. Whether you are privileged or not by your gender depends of how well does the gender role fits you.

Thats true, but in terms of power balance and opportunity chances it is still shifted heavily in white, heterosexual male's favour in a society. The field needs to be made level before it is made balanced, hence the reason the aforementioned difference receives more attention.

[aitm]

Ridiculous column based on nothing but speculative bullshit. This was nothing to do with 'white" anything. the idiot went into a country that was openly hostile towards US citizens and did a minor offense that the government of NK blew up into a crime. This is a political toy and he is a pawn. Nothing to do with any color at all. This is about not going into countries where they hate us. Jesus, this idiot is a nut.

[mauricio]

Thats true, but in terms of power balance and opportunity chances it is still shifted heavily in white, heterosexual male's favour in a society. The field needs to be made level before it is made balanced, hence the reason the aforementioned difference receives more attention.

But only if he actually fits his role. Ultimately it is not about being white or male it is about how well do you function in your societal role how well do you fit as cog on the social machine. Beta males are gonna suffer because they are males but incapable of properly filling their role. Their male "privilege" becomes the source of their suffering. A white poor person in peru is gonna suffer violence and racism because he will exist in a social enviroment which expects him to be rich and arrogant. In contrast a women who wants to be a housewife and taking care of the kids will benefit from her "unprivilage" of not being expected to have a leading role on the bussiness world. Interesting you bring up heterosexuality/homosexuality. From my point of view a male homosexual can't be differentiated from a male heterosexual at a glance and probably some of his suffering is because he does not fit in his male role. Homophobia and heavy dislike for unmanly males must overlap quite a bit, my experiences in traditionalist and conservative circles point to that direction. And one does not need to be a homosexual male to not fit in the male role there's various ways in which you can fail to meet the expectations and suffer social consequences. This is why it is important to see this from a more neutral point of view than what terms like white male privilege and many of their users allow. I do agree there is an imbalance of power distribution pointing towards the direction you say though. I just do not like the way the issue is framed sometimes dimissing the suffering of certain individuals just because they are members of the supposedly privileged identity. That type of collectivist identity politics rhetoric can be obfuscating and dangerous for the prospect of reasonable resolution to social conflicts. It is also pretty useless in international discussions like those on the internet. It would be better to have less politicized terms that address the underlying mechanics of privilege beyond the specific case of the US.

[GSOgymrat]

Ridiculous column based on nothing but speculative bullshit. This was nothing to do with 'white" anything. the idiot went into a country that was openly hostile towards US citizens and did a minor offense that the government of NK blew up into a crime. This is a political toy and he is a pawn. Nothing to do with any color at all. This is about not going into countries where they hate us. Jesus, this idiot is a nut.

People often view unfortunate events through the lens of their own bias to reinforce their personal narrative of the world. When you don't share that person's lens he or she can appear like "a nut."

When you're a hammer everything looks like a nail.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

Needless to say that this fool has got to be regretting his actions in NK. I highly doubt that he made his trip there purely to demonstrate to the world just how privileged he is as a white male. Does anyone realistically think he just woke up one day and thought, 'By golly I'm a priveledged white man and I am going to NK and show those slanty eyed bastards that I can go and do as I damned well please and the white world will come to my rescue and even start WWIII to protect me! '?
I get where the author is coming from even if it's not really hitting the mark. Sometimes people just do extraordinarily stupid shit and have to pay the price for their stupidity.
I have about as much sympathy for the guy as I do for someone getting kicked out of the forum for calling everyone names for no reason which is approximately zero divided by zero.
I do get a bit tired of reading all about this white male privilege thing AS IF any white male in the US can commit any crime any time, any place of any severity without ever having to answer for their actions, but on the same hand I've witnessed up close and personal the effects of the privilege in a court room where I walked home free and clear while the black guy beside me in court was dragged right back to the cells for the exact same offense..

[aitm]

But only if he actually fits his role. Ultimately it is not about being white or male it is about how well do you function in your societal role how well do you fit as cog on the social machine. Beta males are gonna suffer because they are males but incapable of properly filling their role.

Lordy I know I should not get involved in this but…..

Your sentence says to me: Your role in society is defined by what you put into it. Work harder than the person next to you and you will achieve more.
So if you meant something else, you need to word it differently for me anyway.


Beta males are only beta if they want to be. They do fit a role and it is the role they choose because beta want to be beta. If they wanted to be alpha, they could be fucking alpha if they wanted to. The whole alpha- beta thing is a very crucial part of the range of human sexuality of which the sliding scale designates the degrees of male physiology to female in a way that defines the alpha "aggressive" male all the way down to neuter or complete androgyny and continues down to the "omega" of completely passive female. Everyone of us has been a sideline reporter in human sexuality. We have watched but are not watching.

[mauricio]

Lordy I know I should not get involved in this but…..

Your sentence says to me: Your role in society is defined by what you put into it. Work harder than the person next to you and you will achieve more.
So if you meant something else, you need to word it differently for me anyway.

No that is not what i meant. Your social role is by definition mainly defined by society as a whole not you. It is defined by the accumulation of expectations the majority of individuals of your society have of members of your particular role within it. My point was that the privileged people are the ones who actually fit in their roles organically. For example males with lower than average testosterone who are overly conservative, submissive and introverted do not fit the male role in many societies. This can be changed to a certain degree with self improvement but there's obviously natural tendencies that will make it much harder for this deviant individual to exist in this role. Basically what I'm saying is that privilege and restriction is not completely defined by the role you get but also by how much it aligns with your natural tendencies as an individual with specific biological and psychological structures. The thing you mention of beta males having their role too is also true i guess, this beta male role may be a more natural fit for them but bring them social repercussions they do not appreciate. I think a lot of social activist groups and the like are deviants working to forge themselves more comfortable roles in a society that gave them the short end of the stick. This is palpable in some of the more emotionally driven discourse of feminists and MRAs they are expressing their pain of not fitting in with rage and bile. I do not make generalized value judgements about any of this though so do not misrepresent me. I think some of this anger is the product of rather unethical impositions of unjustified social norms, but there's also anger that is like complaining you cannot breathe underwater. There's also a lot of confident blaming going around which I do not really think is reasonable.

[mauricio]

Lordy I know I should not get involved in this but…..

Your sentence says to me: Your role in society is defined by what you put into it. Work harder than the person next to you and you will achieve more.
So if you meant something else, you need to word it differently for me anyway.


Beta males are only beta if they want to be. They do fit a role and it is the role they choose because beta want to be beta. If they wanted to be alpha, they could be fucking alpha if they wanted to. The whole alpha- beta thing is a very crucial part of the range of human sexuality of which the sliding scale designates the degrees of male physiology to female in a way that defines the alpha "aggressive" male all the way down to neuter or complete androgyny and continues down to the "omega" of completely passive female. Everyone of us has been a sideline reporter in human sexuality. We have watched but are not watching.

Also there will always be betas even if they try their hardest to be alphas. That's how sexual selection works. That's why sexual dimorphism and reproduction is evolutionary useful. It creates an evolutionary pressure than selects the most sexually fit to actually pass their genes while the rest die off. Many of the sexually selected characteristics are generally advantageous for adaptation to the enviroment, survival, fertility and ultimately the spread of genes.

BTW this does not mean that if you have natural beta male tendencies you are fucked forever. As you said this goes in degrees and our modern society with the prohibition of poligamy and enforced monogamy and other rules actually helps beta males imo. You do not need to be the top dog to enjoy a comfortable position on the hierarchy.

Edit: btw what actually defines sexual fitness in human males, specially nowadays is probably not just something super simplified like aggresiveness and being a "bad boy" whatever that means. Though I think androgens and their correlation with reduced risk aversion and the attractiveness of ambition in males are all relevant things.

[Baruch]

Muy macho, hombre ;-)

[drunkenshoe]