(Part 3) Best specific demographic studies according to redditors
We found 670 Reddit comments discussing the best specific demographic studies. We ranked the 278 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the products ranked 41-60. You can also go back to the previous section.
53. White Identity Politics (Cambridge Studies in Public Opinion and Political Psychology)
2 mentions
I am not very knowledgeable about Argentina but as a Venezuelan that's currently researching my country's history in depth, in particular economic history, I may be able to answer about it.
To understand Venezuela, you must understand its oil industry. By the turn of the 20th century, Venezuela was politically unstable and heavily indebted. A civil war and skirmishes with local caudillos made the country a hot mess to rule over, and political and economical growth was going slowly.
Enter Juan Vicente Gomez. Second-in-command for President Cipriano Castro, he seized power from him in 1908 as the latter went abroad for surgery. And until his death in 1935, he oversaw the change from a crop-based economy to an oil-exporting one, and it would remain as such till today. He was the first one to direct the oil revenues to modernization and infrastructure development, while taking a large cut for himself and his cronies. The concession-based model for mining and oil extraction that would last until the 1970s, along with minuscule taxation, allowed the foreign companies to take abroad most of the profits from the oil.
Although the Natives and Spaniards knew about the presence of oil beneath the surface thanks to oil seeps, industrial drilling did not take place until the 1910s, due to an increased demand from industrialization and the advent of the internal combustion engine. And in 1922, the oil well Barroso II blew out, spewing a hundred thousand barrels of oil per day for nine days into the air, which was a wonderful PR move by the oil to announce its bountiful presence, and a beacon for foreign companies (i.e. Shell, Esso, British Petroleum) to start large-scale drilling and, soon, refining. In less than a decade, Venezuela would become the third largest oil producer, and largest exporter, in the world.
As mentioned before, the State did not really partake on this bonanza, making most of its income by selling concessions to drill. Political pressures towards democracy and a fair share of the revenues had to wait until Gomez's death in 1935. The country began a slow transition towards democracy and in 1943, it was codified into Law that the State would receive half of the profits from the oil industry. An even bigger share meant larger projects, and with the advent of the first truly democratic government of Romulo Gallegos in 1948, the country was already planning or working on massive public projects: Caracas' University City, housing and government offices, industrial development, bridges...
Around this time, a military government by Marcos Perez Jimenez took hold, ruling between 1952-1958. Oil revenue was essentially unchanged, but modernization and development became a matter of prestige and national security. Also around this time, there was a serious discussion on what to do with the oil revenue. Ultimately the "Sowing the Oil" concept, developed by Arturo Uslar Pietri, dominated. That means that the best way to invest the oil revenue was to invest in the people and the country; via the aforementioned massive public projects but also funding public education, healthcare, and culture, as well as working to export refined goods and not crude oil, and invest on other industries (most notably steel).
By 1961, with democracy properly restored, the country was prosperous.
A few years before, the Venezuelan Bolivar was the highest valued currency in the world.^^1 A welfare state was in place, ensuring the oil revenues were distributed among the people. Politically, a two-party system took hold, which did not allow for much change. And collusion between the parties, as well as the ridiculous amount of state revenue, allowed corruption and inefficiency to flourish. But as long as the oil kept flowing, this could be maintained, and the people were happy.In 1976, oil was fully nationalized, and PDVSA, the State's oil company, began operations. Venezuela was known at this time as the "Saudi Venezuela", with a high quality of life and an enviable position in Latin America. But shortly thereafter, in the 1980s oil glut, coupled with mismanagement, inefficiency, and corruption, as well as a political desire to keep the welfare state in place, led to bad fiscal and economic policies such as devaluing and fixing an exchange price for the Bolivar and ballooning public debt. The system was unsustainable, and the situation worsened until the nation required a bailout from the IMF. This proved wildly unpopular, and led to massive protests, two coup attempts and an impeachment and, ultimately, inflation and worsening economic conditions that led to the rise of Hugo Chavez in 1998.
This basically covers 20th century Venezuela. I highly recommend watching the three-part El Reventon documentary about the Venezuelan oil history, if you can find it in English. For a more general Latin American woes, including Argentina, Open Veins of Latin America is great for history, but... iffy on economic theory. For a more economic view, Guide for the Perfect Latin American Idiot is a direct counter for the economic theory on that book, and I believe the two ought to be read together.
A review of his book basically said as much:
>Grammy-winning musician Davis gets taken for a ride by the KKK in this futile and pointless volume. When a friend of his says he is joining the Ku Klux Klan, Davis approaches a few local heavies hoping to find "common ground'' on which they can stand. Surprisingly, Davis is able to form friendships with some of the racists he meets--or so it would seem. What never occurs to Davis is that he may be being used by these people. For instance, Roger Kelly, who is still active in the KKK, is depicted as a white "separatist'' as opposed to a white "supremacist.'' Davis seems oblivious to Kelly's smooth way of talking out of both sides of his mouth and casts him as a victim in an episode of "reverse discrimination'' at Howard University, where Kelly is denied entrance to a talk show on racist groups. In the most ridiculous case, Kelly names Davis godfather to his newborn daughter. Nowhere during these scenes does the author consider that his book might be the perfect vehicle by which Kelly can gain new members. In another truly offensive scene, Davis visits the National Holocaust Museum, where he interviews several luminaries on the hate scene who are protesting the museum but neglects to mention their purpose--the protesters deny the Holocaust took place. Indeed, the anti-Semitism of the KKK is a massive blind spot for Davis. Finally, he endlessly makes excuses for Klan members who are no longer violent, as if this somehow mitigates their continued membership in such a terrorist organization. The dual dangers of this book are that some readers will find tacit support for their beliefs that blacks are easily led and others will view the Klan as "not all that bad'' and perhaps join where they otherwise might not have. (16 pages photos not seen) -- Copyright ©1997, Kirkus Associates, LP. All rights reserved.
https://www.amazon.com/Klan-destine-Relationships-Daryl-Davis/dp/0882821598/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1537834016&sr=8-1
Also there's a clip from his documentary that I can never seem to find where he won't even consider Kwame Rose's extremely valid points against him. This guy is bad.
OP is highlighting a tried-and-true tactic to bias opinions. Claiming this-trait-we-like is genetic, whereas this-trait-we-don't-like is learned.
Feminism successfully used this tactic to cast positive-female and negative-male traits as innate (nature), and cast negative-female and positive-male traits as learned (nurture).
John Gordon in his book "The Myth of the Monstrous Male" discusses this tactic and presents the following illustration.
Create four lists of adjectives to describe: (1) positive male traits, (2) negative male traits, (3) positive female traits, and (4) negative female traits. Gordon provides the following:
Feminism claims that M+ and F- are learned, whereas M- and F+ are innate. This is the source of bullshit like "if women ran the world, there would be no wars." Or "If women ran wall-street, we could have avoided our current economic meltdown".
If a man does something good, it's because some woman nurtured him well. If a man does something bad, it's because men are innately evil.
A lot of people believe this shit.
I'll quote Gordon further:
> ... if a mother nurses her baby, it's her doing; if she kills it, it's some doctor's [fault].
> ...
> You cannot continue the above lists very far without noticing that many of the permutations -- for instance from "adventuresome" to "reckless" (M+ to M-) or from "timid" to "prudent" (F- to F+) are just positive or negative terms for the same thing, no more objectively distinguishable than the difference between "sweet" and "too sweet." That is why language, as opposed to anything real, is so important to these people. As with Judy Chicago's Dinner Party, they believe that the issue is not so much what is in the picture as it is the frame around the picture and the label put on the frame: A pornographic painting or literary passage becomes transfigured when labeled as part of a show for the edification of women, or included in a book on the sins of male authors.
> The reverse applies equally. Take absolutely any page at all from the oeuvre of Andrea Dworkin, for instance, give it to a feminist literary critic as an example of the dialog of some male novelist's female character, and it will not take her long to identify this character Dworkin as a fourth-rate Molly Bloom illustrating all the sexist stereotypes -- the flow, the gush, the luridness and hysteria, the syntactic torpor and logical slobbishness and everywhere manifest all-around crappiness of mind. Then take away the homo fecit, and suddenly we have a leading feminist spokesperson, her excesses the mark of a noble soul hurt into anger, transcending male-imposed standards. So for all its fertile-Myrtle lyricism about woman as the source of everything living and everything real, modern feminism is often very close to the ultimate abstractness of total relativism: nothing true or false, good or bad, but thinking, and above all naming, makes it so. It accepts the substantiality of substance no more than it does the reasonableness of reason.
> It may be observed that [the above lists are] simply a logical outgrowth of the outline of history given [earlier in the book], the essential idea of which is that the "womanhood" originating in the state of nature (F+) degenerates into "femininity" (F-) when passing under the influence of maleness (M-). The corollary is that M+, such as it is, is is a partially redeemed extract of M-, savage man socialized by woman halfway to humanity, at the cost of her own happiness and purity.
> In other words, women are good for men and men are bad for women. (It is at this point that we are likely to hear of polls indicating that single women are happier than single men, and married men happier than married women, thereby showing that marriage is good for men but bad for women (!!) -- a set of figures that, if accurate, would lead to the conclusion that the traditional female attitude toward marriage is a sign of the most virulent masochism, or stupidity, or both.) Again, this may sound like a ridiculously reductive version of a wide and still-evolving range of ideas. And again, I can only say, look around.
"The Myth of the Monstrous Male" was published in 1982.
(!!) How many articles in magazines and newspapers since 1982 have claimed this exact result?
Thirty years ago, John Gordon's seminal MR book, Myth of the Monstrous Male, pointed out how middle/upper-class white women have usurped programmes (positive discrimination, affirmative action) rightly meant for blacks.
https://www.amazon.com/myth-monstrous-other-feminist-fables/dp/0872237583
Fearing the Black Body: The Racial Origins of Fat Phobia
Yep, someone wrote that book.
If you want to understand racists, read one of the really great critical scholarly histories of their movement, some of the rich political psychology work on white identity and racial attitudes, or work on the politics of ethnocentrism. All of these will help you understand real white bigotry and white nationalism in the world, and crucially none of them is white-nationalist propaganda that claims something wild like that white nationalism is some kind of perfectly valid alternative interpretive frame for looking at consensus reality.
I don't understand this title. Why "as recently"? That's not recently at all... Nor was the 1969 White Paper aimed at "ending poverty" as much as it was to "abolish the Indian Act and dismantle the established legal relationship between Aboriginal peoples and the state of Canada in favour of equality." Which is directly from the Wiki page that you linked.
It was also a terrible idea. It was so bad that it spurred First Nations peoples to organize against it, leading to the publication of Harold Cardinal's Unjust Society and Harold Adams' Prison of Grass. These two books shaped a generation of First Nations peoples to fight against the actions of the federal government.
I have started and erased this comment three times now.
Basically, I don't remember how or when I first realized trans men existed. There was someone on my freshman year of high school bus who was female assigned but male identified--he used to just tell people he was actually a boy and that was that. For some reason while I clearly remember that (lo these cough 20 years later), I only vaguely had a sense that kid had anything to do with me. I'm generally pretty avoidant, so I walled off that part for as long as I possibly could.
I remember meeting some trans kids at the Chicago pride parade in like 1997--but again, while some part of my brain understood superficially that they were some variety of trans, I wouldn't let myself process it at all. I think I posted on some planetout / AOL trans threads, but not from supportive or self-identifying place at all, but more of a "trans critical" place.
My freshman year of college I finally had semi-privacy and a fast internet connection in my own dorm room...but I don't remember using it to research trans issues at all. I was involved in ...Indigo Girls and Ani DiFranco fan sites / list servs, and there were totally some trans folks on those, but I explained them away to myself as experimenting kids. HOW FUCKING IN DENIAL CAN YOU BE?????
That was the year Matthew Shepard was murdered, and I was on a small midwestern campus and was a super visible queer, and I remember we had a candlelight vigil and a guy in a pickup truck screamed at us, and for me being "gay" was more important socially that those weird gender rumblings that were going on. Strangely enough I briefly dated someone there who also went on to transition ftm, and we never even talked about what a few years later would take over our lives. lol.
At some point that same school year, I was back with my soft butch high school girlfriend (I was a big fan of butch-butch pairings), and we were in a Borders Bookstore in suburban Milwaukee and holding hands or whatever, and these two middle aged gay guys walked up to us and told us we were adorable and handed us a book they said would be "perfect" for us--it was called Dagger: On Butch Women (http://www.amazon.com/Dagger-Butch-Roxxie-Linnga-Due/dp/0939416824) and it was like a dollar or something because it was already a kind of old book (1994...and this would have been 1999) BUT AND HERE'S THE IMPORTANT PART:
THERE WERE A WHOLE TWO CHAPTERS OR SO ABOUT TRANS MEN (were those gay guys my guardian angels???)
granted, why were trans men in a book about "butch women"--well, we could debate that, but it was definitely more of a 90s thing, and I can't explain it at all.
And that book had Michael Hernandez in it, and even then he was a big bad bald bearded dude, and I hadn't even realized you could take, like, testosterone and stuff. So that book was very valuable, though it also hindered a bit because it was already out of date and talked about things like mail-order pants stuffers made out of industrial foam that some dude in California would carve into a wang for you (I'm not even kidding) or Morris Designs surgical vests as binders. It was a far, far different world when we had to like send a check to a weird address we found in a book and hope they sent us the thing.
alright, this is already too long and too personal.
Get a job, save money, and make plans to be self sufficient, and get as far away from them as possible when you graduate from highschool and/or turn 18.
I also highly recommend Sarah Schulman's book [Ties That Bind: Familial Homophobia and It's Consequences]
(https://www.amazon.com/Ties-That-Bind-Homophobia-Consequences/dp/1595588167).
Know that you are one of thousands upon thousands of people who have been this, and that you are not alone.
Statistically there are more random traffic stops on blacks than whites.
Anecdotally, when I lived in small town Utah, my employer hired a black news photographer from out of state. He got pulled over an average of 3 times daily for the first several weeks he worked for us, for reasons like "it looked like your license plate light was out", and never got ticketed. After he'd met every officer in town he stopped getting stopped.
Maybe have a look at this: http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2012/04/03/hip-hop-is-for-lovers/
Specifically:
>...LB: I find that as a hip hop fan who also keeps some mainstream feminist company, I find myself defending the very existence of the genre among other feminists. Uche, I know you’ve addressed this before in prior interviews more generally, but what do the HH4L ladies have to say to feminists who accuse hip hop at large of too much sexual bravado and objectification of women?
>Uche: When I first began discussing the concept of HH4L, I got mixed responses. People said everything from there is not enough music to support that to Hip Hop doesn’t talk about love and even expecting us to not deal with certain subjects or play certain songs. Sexual bravado and objectification of women happens in every culture. Hip Hop is not the only one. If you are not attuned to the culture of Hip Hop or anything remotely related to the experience of those that make or enjoy this varied and layered music, I would suggest you do some real investigation into it before labeling it as such. All hip hop music does not have sexual bravado and objectify women just like all feminists aren’t white man hating lesbians. Right?
>Lenée: I’m taking a deep breath as I type this, because I have so very much to say. First, Hip Hop culture and music are the result of a colonial history: the history of Black folks in the US. Hip Hop culture exists as a mirror of larger US culture and also as a filter of that culture. As an agent of the culture, the music speaks to an array of experiences and perspectives. Yes, the primary media makers in the culture are heterosexual cisgender men of color (mostly black-identified). Yes, there is sexual bravado, and yes there’s objectification of women. I think that the tendency of people I identify as outsiders — usually academics, often white people, and way too often white cisgender women who ID as feminists — is to be outraged first and ask questions later.
>LB: (Also, dear readers, there is about ten-plus years of womanist and feminist scholarship by women of color on hip hop, on women in hip hop, and hip hop feminism, so please google-fu if this is news.)
>Lenée: If a straight man makes a song about someone he’s attracted to, we know it sure as shit isn’t gonna be a song about one of his homeboys. So, objectification of women is gonna happen. It cannot be avoided. The extent to which it goes is my concern. As far as the sexual bravado goes, I’d like to direct any and everyone with this critique to study stereotypes about black men — namely the construct of the big black buck. Sometimes rappers reinforce the constructs, sometimes they build their own identities in the shadow of those constructs… And other times, nobody’s paying attention to what doesn’t fit what they’re looking for. Just so they can be outraged first and ask questions later. Also: Lady (“Yankin’”) is just as full of braggadocio as any song by a man that we’ve played on the show, if not more. I’m certain that different ideas apply because she’s a woman and the decency police feel differently about her. But that’s probably a blog post in and of itself.
>LB: No kidding. I was googling Lady out of curiosity and saw that she gets a lot of blowback about that song. (I can’t even begin to dissect the video.) Sure it’s sexually explicit, but it’s not meant to be a deep song. What it is is an affirmative, body-positive song about getting laid. The narrator has agency, she’s enjoying herself, it’s consensual. There’s a place for that and it’s a worthwhile narrative, so I think the real problem — and there is considerable scholarship on the “acceptable” roles for women in hip hop — is when the only available slots for women in the mainstream are the super-sexy Trinas or the crunchier Lauryn Hills.
>Uche: The song “Yankin’” and those like it have its place in Hip Hop. The whole social construct that it’s taboo for women to speak on their sexual prowess is really outdated (to me anyway).
>Lenée: I agree. It’s really simple to me: dudes rap about the presence of alcohol and/ or drugs in sexual encounters. They talk about being great in bed, good in bed, the king of cunnilingus or whatever. A lot. T.I. (he calls himself the pussy pumper!), for instance, talks about handing out bottles of Grey Goose and ecstasy pills as he has multiple partner sex. In more than one song. I’ve heard the most harsh criticism about Lady from “real Hip Hop heads,” people who actively and vocally ask for the return of Leaders of the New School, DAS Efx, and LL Cool J’s first nose. I think Lady’s song is epic. It’s fun. It’s got a good beat. And at the end of the day she’s not hurting anyone. Lots of folks seem to have gone out of their way in online spaces to decry “Yankin’” and act like it’s The Sole Reason Black People Can’t Have Nice Things. As if it isn’t R. Kelly. (Jokes.)...
Lauren Bruce interview with Uche and Lenée, hosts of Hip Hop is For Lovers (a multimedia web experience dedicated to looking at love, sex and intimacy through the lens of hip hop culture. Its centerpiece is a weekly woman-centered, queer-friendly and justice-heavy podcast that features discussions about a variety of relationship topics punctuated with the best in rap.)
Everyone who is not white should read this
https://www.amazon.com/Longer-Talking-White-People-About/dp/140887055X
First Nation? Second Thoughts by Tom Flanagan is probably the most representative book on the conservative (small c) view of Indigenous issues; I know some people have a negative opinion towards Flanagan, but this work is great by most academic standards and I think it's a must read for anyone interested in Indigenous issues.
Citizens Plus: Aboriginal Peoples and the Canadian State by Alan Cairns. This was Cairns response to the Royal Commission on Aboriginal's people. Again, I think it's a must read to learn more about the various perspectives about Indigenous issues.
Wasase: Indigenous Pathways of Action and Freedom by Taiaiake Alfred. Alfred is probably the most "extreme" in terms of his vision for Indigenous peoples in Canada, but he's a must read.
Unjust Society by Harold Cardinal. This book provides the greatest insight into why the White Paper was met with opposition from Indigenous peoples and to Indigenous issues in general (it's a little older, but if you were to read one book out of all the ones I recommended this would be it)
Governing from the Centre: The Concentration of Power in Canadian Politics by Donald Savoie. I haven't read this one yet (I hope to soon) so I can't speak to how it is, but I've been told it's a great book. It basically looks at how the federal government has become increasingly centralized into the PMO
EDIT: If you go to university/college and have free access to academic journals you should look in those. There are so many interesting articles and are less time consuming than books. Here's a directory of open access journals, but keep in mind not all of these journals are of "top quality"
Brazil: The latin american idiot that think anti-america, anti-europe, vote for populist politicians, and propagate a dirt-dumb form of socialism. Usually you see them wearing a t-shirt with che's picture on it.
insert link to the Amazon page for Queering Anarchism here
I actually just posted this link to the subreddit so here you go, and then please remember Black and Hispanic people are overrepresented in poverty in the United States.
I'm not smart or eloquent enough to educate you on this but there's a book called Afro Asia: Revolutionary Political and Cultural Connections between African Americans and Asian Americans and in one of the first chapters it talks about how the non-refugee and not-coincidentally richer Asians in this country brought their life savings with them and invested it in single tracks to become business owners, educators, and other professionals. These are the kids in good schools. The contexts behind Asian, Black and brown peoples' prosperities are all so different. You can pick and choose which standard to judge races by when we're all subject to different pressures in the first place.
> The sad thing is that a lot of black and latino parents simply don't value education and they are not willing to put in the time and money to see their kids succeed,
This is totally anecdotal and racist... Wikipedia "model minority," "brain drain," and "selective immigration" if you'd like.
https://www.amazon.com/Queering-Anarchism-Addressing-Undressing-Desire/dp/1849351201/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1488722684&sr=1-1
See david a. Harris' ” profiles in injustice: why racial profiling cannot work” for hard numbers. There ARE some traffic cops in nyc who never in an entire year pull over a non black person. Since all races break traffic laws right and left, that's racism.
edit: adding link now that I'm not on a phone.
http://www.amazon.com/Profiles-Injustice-Police-Profiling-Cannot/dp/1565846966
The book does a great job of pointing out why it's ineffective policing to pull over people based on skin color when a much better indication of a criminal is BEHAVIOR / ACTIONS.
Every single "person with similar views as nolimitsoldier" I have encountered has always fallen into 1 of the following groups.
To learn more about feminism you can read or watch the following websites,books, or videos:
Youtube Videos or Channels:
Websites/Blogs:
Books:
For the lazy:
amazon link
Can I post links here? “Fearing the black body, the racial origins of fat phobia” is on my reading list.
Fearing the Black Body https://www.amazon.com/dp/1479886750/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_YWiMDbWEXVHM6
You'd most likely to find more about your topic in papers rather than books. Better off going to your local library. I have a few from my university's library, but that was about the simillarity of traditional poetry and Hip-Hop.
EDIT: Format
To be fair, there are many books on this subject. Sometimes a pithy tweet works even better.
Deaf Gain by Bauman and Murray for sure.
"Pain is weakness leaving the body"
Take (y)our problems and turn them into opportunities.
Time has a funny way of changing everything.
Did you know in the past, blacks and asians marched together against racism?
http://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2017/04/19/524571669/model-minority-myth-again-used-as-a-racial-wedge-between-asians-and-blacks
http://reappropriate.co/2017/03/unpacking-get-outs-asian-character/
https://www.amazon.com/Afro-Asia-Revolutionary-Political-Connections/dp/0822342812/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1488826874&sr=1-1&keywords=9780822342816&tag=viglink128014-20
I know that Asians can receive racism from Blacks, but returning racism and deepening the divide will not help anyone. We worked together previously, why not again?
Why not bring all minorities combat racism together? I know people's traditional view of masculinity is a muscular, wealthy, promiscuous man, and that is certainly good, but masculinity is also more than that. It is being the best person you can be, loving all people and choosing to do the right thing even when it is hard to do so. I think Asians, because we are the "model minority" are in the perfect place to fight racism. What happens when the "model minority" calls a racist out for their bullshit? Continue to not give up hope, spread the word, and improve yourself to the best person you can be. It is the best way to say, "fuck you" to the system.
This subreddit is full of inspirational and woke people.
Here's a link to it on Amazon:
How Does It Feel to Be a Problem, by Moustafa Bayoumi^reflink-thx
If you want to know where all the negative stuff comes from: The Ties That Bind
Acceptance and inclusion are what stops the negative stuff.
It’s not weird to be gay, so why would it be weird to be accepting? Being gay is normal and common. It’s just not the majority.
If he has found someone to date at 14 then more power to him. You get to be there to support him. Being sex positive is a wonderful thing.
The only way to change the shitty world is to live in it. He will come across shitty people in life regardless of the gay. Dealing with it now will make life easier in the long run. The world will be a better place by being out. The world is a nicer place when you’re out.
Gay people need to be exposed to one another in order to have self acceptance. The South needs to be exposed to gay people to accept and love them.
Those who are playing politics with the disabled. I could say politicians but there's more than just them.
Right. And those can be turned into economic benefits. For example, from Deaf Gain, they gave examples of a city government specifically hiring deaf police officers to monitor their security camera (with their keen eyes!) and Goodyear and the Firestone specifically hiring deaf workers (with their swift fingers!).
EDIT: For those who are curious about Deaf Gain, here's a good post on it.
I took a class on Native American Women, we read a book called Conquest. It is a heavy nonfiction book, but it is extremely informative. It’s about sexual violence and genocide of indigenous people.
Not exactly biology, but does anthropology count? Conquest by Andrea Smith explains great deals of info about the relationship of race and racism as a social construct, and relationship with colonialism, imperialism and genocide.
https://www.amazon.com/Conquest-Sexual-Violence-American-Genocide/dp/0822360381
Of course you don’t see or feel the privilege. And this is absolutely no fault of your own. You’ve had it your whole life. To you it’s perfectly normal, expected, it’s the status quo and it is invisible to you.
I had this very discussion with my uncle-in-law a little while back. He couldn’t understand how people of color and people in poverty can’t live “the American Dream” simply by working hard (ie “pull yourself up by your bootstraps). He kept pointing out the challenges in his own upbringing and how he had overcome them “all on his own.” He just could not see how his upper middle class upbringing which included a working father and stay at home mom both of whom were college educated, four bedroom house in a good neighborhood, and private schooling with after school tutoring had afforded him a level of privilege not available to people in poverty.
So here is my challenge to you. Go and find a black man any black man and ask them about how they have experienced racism and discrimination in their own lives; ask him how he responds to being pulled over by a cop. Find a poor family of color using government assistance and ask them about how they are talked to by everyday people while they work two full time jobs and go without food to make sure their kids have dinner. Go and find a person who speaks with a Spanish accent and ask them how often they are told to “go back where they came from.” Go and find a woman working in the same position as you do and ask her what her salary is. Go and ask a woman what she does to protect herself when she has to go out alone at night.
Then ask yourself why YOU have never experienced those things. The answer is because you are a white male. Still don’t believe me. Then pull out a book and read. Here are some great books that will educate you to the condition of people of color:
These are just a few examples. There are Oh so many more. Before you discount the idea of privilege make sure you educate yourself about the condition of the people under your feet.
YOU may not be putting people down to pull yourself up, but that doesn’t mean you didn’t start higher up the ladder than they did.
Wow, his book sounds fascinating, I can't wait for the updated version to be released. Looks like online the cheapest copy online at the moment is like
~$80~$56 on ebay, looks like.There's always an in-between option, or a both option. You may wish to check out the book Dagger: On Butch Women which, in spite of its name, covers a good range of butch afab gender identity.
a fascinating book on this if you're interested
Disclaimer, I dislike Identity Politics and I think white Identity Politics is the most pernicious. I was kind of hesitant to share this as I didn't want people to think its some sort of nod of approval of Identity politics... But this bit of research is pretty interesting Hope you find it so as well.
>Ashley Jardina is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Duke University. Her research explores the nature of racial attitudes, the development of group identities, and the way in which these factors influence political preferences and behavior. She is primarily interested in how Americans are responding to increasing diversity, and her current project explores the conditions under which white racial identification and white consciousness among white Americans is a salient and significant predictor of policies, candidates, and attitudes toward racial and ethnic groups. She is also interested in the study of gender and politics. Her dissertation won the 2015 American Political Science Association award for the best dissertation in race and ethnic politics.
>
>Ashley recently published a new book, White Identity Politics, that “offers a landmark analysis of emerging patterns of white identity and collective political behavior, drawing on sweeping data.” In this episode Ashley speaks with Chris about her book, and how she found contrasting attitudes between white people in America who identify with their race and white people who don’t. She also explains how previous generations of political scientists have been mistaken in conflating the issue of racial prejudice and the issue of identity when explaining the politics of white Americans.
>
>Related Links
>
>White Identity Politics by Ashley Jardina
>
>Dangerous Frames: How Ideas about Race and Gender Shape Public Opinion by Nicholas Winter
>
>The Disturbing, Surprisingly Complex Relationship Between White Identity Politics and Racism, New Yorker Q&A with Isaac Chotiner
>
>Interview with Ashley Jardina on the New Books Network
>
>Transcript
>
>This is a transcript of the episode.
My recs for someone who is just getting into Feminism:
Black Rednecks and White Liberals, by Thomas Sowell.
White Guilt: How Blacks and Whites Together Destroyed the Promise of the Civil Rights Era, by Shelby Steele.
Black Lies Matter: Why Lies Matter to the Race Grievance Industry, by Taleeb Starkes.
Another lib proving my point. How about you read some of her research and educate yourself! Oh wait, I forgot libs can't handle FACTS 😂😂😂
Many Black people have woken up to the fact that what you are saying here is completely false.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbP33yl_kT4
Black LIES Matter
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1523615915/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_awdb_t1_tbFYBbMP874PZ
https://www.amazon.com/Longer-Talking-White-People-About/dp/140887055X