Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Non-black people think individual black people are responsible for the entire "black community" because they believe that ALL blacks are low-class. It is the stereotypes of low-class blacks that pervade American media and society as the dominant black culture.
It is also believed that the plight of low-income blacks is 100 % of their own making. It is believed by racists that racism no longer exists and blacks who are in poverty with out-of-wedlock children, and live with crime are people who have great opportunities afforded to them that they just squander out of sheer laziness, while poor white people are given more sympathy and are believed to just be victims of circumstance.
People deny that the advantage that poor whites have over poor blacks is white privilege. You take a poor white man with drug problems, criminal history and no education, clean him up, and put him in a suit with a briefcase in hand and stand him next to a black man who is educated, and upper middle-class with no criminal history, which of the two are people going to make negative assumptions about?
It's has been proven that employers will hire a white man with a criminal history and no education over a black man with an education and no criminal history. It's also been proven time again that employers throw the resumes of applicants with "black-sounding" names in the trash. I've even talked to people who work in human resources or have been privy to the hiring process at their jobs tell me that this happens all the time, particularly and especially in office/corporate jobs.
There is a different--very different office culture between the two groups, to be fair. In my own experience last year I went from a predominantly white office to a predominantly black office when our company consolidated offices. It was like night and day with work ethic and rule following. I have to continually re-train the black employees on basic job functions they should have learned and been using years ago.. There was just a lax standard of expectations held that is hard to break. I think we need to take an honest look at why these cultural perceptions and stereotypes exist. Again, this is just my experience and certainly not representative of an entire race, but the reality is that this type of thing is more common than some are willing to admit.
Non-black people think individual black people are responsible for the entire "black community" because they believe that ALL blacks are low-class. It is the stereotypes of low-class blacks that pervade American media and society as the dominant black culture.
It is also believed that the plight of low-income blacks is 100 % of their own making. It is believed by racists that racism no longer exists and blacks who are in poverty with out-of-wedlock children, and live with crime are people who have great opportunities afforded to them that they just squander out of sheer laziness, while poor white people are given more sympathy and are believed to just be victims of circumstance.
People deny that the advantage that poor whites have over poor blacks is white privilege. You take a poor white man with drug problems, criminal history and no education, clean him up, and put him in a suit with a briefcase in hand and stand him next to a black man who is educated, and upper middle-class with no criminal history, which of the two are people going to make negative assumptions about?
It's has been proven that employers will hire a white man with a criminal history and no education over a black man with an education and no criminal history. It's also been proven time again that employers throw the resumes of applicants with "black-sounding" names in the trash. I've even talked to people who work in human resources or have been privy to the hiring process at their jobs tell me that this happens all the time, particularly and especially in office/corporate jobs.
This, exactly. No matter how bad of a background a white man has, it's irrelevant unless it is revealed. A white man can go on drugs (Robert Downey Jr.), clean up and become one of the biggest pop culture phenomenon's in the world. A black guy with no apparent history doesn't get that. He would get stereotypical roles vs a white guy.
White men have more opportunities period. They just fall on their lap. Black guys have to use timewarp forward and backward to get on the same level.
Because in their (the people saying all blacks are responsible) minds, blacks are one collective group sharing 1 brain.
While whites are special little snowflakes with so many varying opinions.
Apparently those same people aren't to blame for little Jimmy shooting up a public place (no, the trophy society they've created cannot be blamed), but black people and black culture are responsible for every bad in the world.
Notice how Justin Bieber is never described as a thug? But Drake is described as a thug. Miley Cyrus is liberating while Rihanna is every derogatory term in the book. Chris Brown is the founder of domestic violence while Sean Penn is this talented shooting star in the sky.
I've read many derogatory opinions re Bieber and also Miley Cyrus. Sean Penn is not necessarily considered a Golden Boy, either. I don't think those 3 enjoy any sort of pedestal in the eyes of white people. I doubt them being considered special little snowflakes. They made sure they escaped such a description. So many make the mistake of stating what whites think or what blacks think. Such blanket statements prove very little. It seems to me that whites have no problem at all criticizing their own and they do so frequently. The same cannot be said about many blacks, who tend to not be critical of their own. There are exceptions.
I'm not familiar with Drake. Is he a thug? I read many glowing reports about Rihanna. Do you really admire Chris Brown?
This, exactly. No matter how bad of a background a white man has, it's irrelevant unless it is revealed. A white man can go on drugs (Robert Downey Jr.), clean up and become one of the biggest pop culture phenomenon's in the world. A black guy with no apparent history doesn't get that. He would get stereotypical roles vs a white guy.
White men have more opportunities period. They just fall on their lap. Black guys have to use timewarp forward and backward to get on the same level.
No.
Snoop, Dre, Ice Cube, Ice T and 50 Cent all have very well documented criminal histories and for far worse than drug abuse. Dre just sold BEATS to Apple for how much again? If anything they are overrepresented in pop culture.
Poor white trash is looked at as poor white trash by white people, probably more so than most realize. I live in an area that has its share of pill heads and meth heads. They get their share of scorn from everyone. Miley is regarded as white trash.
Society will never be perfect and until people get over themselves and quit playing the perpetual victim they'll never succeed. Of course, playing the perpetual victim frees one from taking any personal responsibility for themselves.
Because in their (the people saying all blacks are responsible) minds, blacks are one collective group sharing 1 brain.
While whites are special little snowflakes with so many varying opinions.
Apparently those same people aren't to blame for little Jimmy shooting up a public place (no, the trophy society they've created cannot be blamed), but black people and black culture are responsible for every bad in the world.
Notice how Justin Bieber is never described as a thug? But Drake is described as a thug. Miley Cyrus is liberating while Rihanna is every derogatory term in the book. Chris Brown is the founder of domestic violence while Sean Penn is this talented shooting star in the sky.
No one in the mainstream media describes Beiber favorably these days. He is recognized as a young man out of control on the verge of self destruction. His police mug shot is everywhere. Miley Cyrus liberating? A few think she is criticized too much - she is an artist! But I bet her "favorable rating" if measured would be low. There is no good press about Lindsey Lohan.
Who is regarded the most untouchable person in show biz? Beyonce. No one dares say anything bad about her. She might be the black equivalent of Meryl Streep.
Who is regarded the most untouchable person in show biz? Beyonce. No one dares say anything bad about her. She might be the black equivalent of Meryl Streep.
Not true. I believe O'Reilly felt the need to criticize her. How unsurprising.
I really can't agree with this. You say conservatives don't feel an obligation to help the less fortunate. Do you realize that all the Christians across the World doing charity work are almost all conservatives?
Do you realize that studies have shown that Republicans give more to charity(non religious) than Democrats?
I do realize that, and I'm a firm believer that there are very few people who fall 100% into any ideology. By most standards, Jesus was a liberal when it came to his beliefs on how you treat the poor. That being said, the bible also contains the story about "give a man a fish/teach a man to fish" which sums up the conservative stand point and the topic of this thread. You shouldn't do for people, you should help them do it themselves.
A conservative view point focuses on why aren't the people fishing already. They've "been taught" and now the effort needs to come from them, hence the "black community" fixing "black problems" issue.
The liberal view point focuses on why are people starving and tries to give them fish. More of a "white community" fixing "black problems" issue.
I'm not saying either solution is right and I'm certainly not saying that people are only capable of one belief or the other, just that the pure ideological view points fall along those lines.
In practice, I think most people would suggest giving the guy a sandwich while you teach him to fish. Regardless of whether you think teaching vs feeding is more important. But when dealing with people who follow the more conservative view points, you are likely to hear them using the expressions in the OP.
It's has been proven that employers will hire a white man with a criminal history and no education over a black man with an education and no criminal history. It's also been proven time again that employers throw the resumes of applicants with "black-sounding" names in the trash. I've even talked to people who work in human resources or have been privy to the hiring process at their jobs tell me that this happens all the time, particularly and especially in office/corporate jobs.
There have been studies that tend to show what is written above concerning "black" names. But you stopped reading after the first studies were done.
Later studies show that black names reveal more about the parents of these people than it does about the actual life outcomes. A well respected study by the author of the book "Freakonomics" is linked below:
The study examined data for four decades of every child born in California during that period. It is not a five paragraph paper. I encourage you to read it. I'd also like to read your response to it.
A few quotes:
"In our data, however, we find no compelling evidence of a causal impact of Black names on a wide range of life outcomes after controlling for background characteristics. "
"To the extent that Black names are used simply as signals of race by discriminatory employers, it is unlikely that names would be correlated with job outcomes beyond the interview stage since the employer directly observes the applicant’s race once an interview takes place. "
"The results in Table 4 suggest that a woman’s first name is indeed a useful predictor of the circumstances in which she grow up, which may in turn be correlated with labor productivity."
"V. Conclusion.
We document stark differences in naming patterns between Blacks and Whites, and demonstrate that these patterns change sharply over time. While most Blacks have shifted towards more distinctively Black names (particularly in the late 1960s and early 1970s), the fraction of Blacks choosing starkly White names has also increased. How distinctively Black one’s name was appears to have signaled little in the early 1960s. Naming conventions differed modestly across parental characteristics or neighborhood types. The last two decades, however, have led to a “ghettoization” of distinctively Black names, namely, a distinctively Black name is now a much stronger predictor of socio-economic status. Among the theories we consider, models in which the rise of the Black Power movement triggers important changes in Black identity appear to be most consistent with our data. In contrast with prior audit studies of Black names on resumes, we find little evidence that names have a causal impact on adult life outcomes.
More generally, this paper takes first steps towards an attempt to understand what role Black culture might play in explaining continued poverty and racial isolation. With respect to this particular aspect of distinctive Black culture, we conclude that carrying a black name is primarily a consequence rather than a cause of poverty and segregation. "
So let's say in some future black people start becoming ''responsible'' for others in their ''community''...sans the fact that others don't seem to be responsible for their own community. But....let's assume.
So this happens. And then the success rates become very high. Let's say it becomes to the point that 60-70% of all blacks are college educated and 1/4th of all wealthy areas and white color jobs are held by blacks. Let's just play pretend.
Wouldn't people STILL have a problem? Suddenly blacks are ''too smart'' and taking too many jobs?
One black man, like one white man, is not rresponsible for the actions of other blacks or whites. Never can be, never will be.
One observation as to what the OP is about...The term "black community" is tossed about quite freely. That unfairly lumps all blacks together wheter true or not. The term "it's a black thing" has been floated by me as well.
Why is here no mention of a "white community"? It the enttire world considered the white community save for pockets of minority communities? I have never heard "it's a white thing".
I guess the fact there is no notion of white community which somewhat answers the OP.
White people don't rush to the emotional support of each other unless we know the person. Gee willikers, Wally, there are so many damned white people we couldn't be expected to come to each other's needs.
We are also spread out from Yakima, WA to Key West, FL as well as from Bangor, ME to San Diego, CA and all points in between.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
