More Tales Of White Supremacy And White Privilege

[Correll]

The end result is that smart, and successful people breed less while you guys are breeding more.

1. My point about smart, successful people breeding less, stands.

2. Too much money and fame puts a strain on monogamy for some men. Not Obama. Maybe because he is sooooo strong.....morally speaking.

 

[Correll]

The Ivy League schools are a group that has really good documentation on their level of discrimination in favor of blacks.

OK.

Name me an Ivy League school that let's black people with lower scores than whites ?

The study I have read on it, was of ALL the Ivy League schools, and showed that, as a whole they let in black students with far lower scores than white students.


As a whole.


I've discussed them many times on this site. Do you need a link, or do you already know it is true and you are just playing some silly game?

OK. So you can't name one Ivy league school that let's black people in with lower scores than whites.

Just as I thought.

AS A WHOLE. I did not read into the actual academic study to see if it broke it down by individual schools.


But as a whole, the group lets in blacks with lower scores.


Dude. If you pretend to not understand that, you are using the stupid defense to the nth degree. It will not look good on you.

 

[Paul Essien]

The Ivy League schools are a group that has really good documentation on their level of discrimination in favor of blacks.

OK.

Name me an Ivy League school that let's black people with lower scores than whites ?

The study I have read on it, was of ALL the Ivy League schools, and showed that, as a whole they let in black students with far lower scores than white students.


As a whole.


I've discussed them many times on this site. Do you need a link, or do you already know it is true and you are just playing some silly game?

OK. So you can't name one Ivy league school that let's black people in with lower scores than whites.

Just as I thought.

AS A WHOLE. I did not read into the actual academic study to see if it broke it down by individual schools.


But as a whole, the group lets in blacks with lower scores.


Dude. If you pretend to not understand that, you are using the stupid defense to the nth degree. It will not look good on you.

Just tap out. Save face while you can. I asked you to name an Ivy school which let's blacks in with lower scores than whites but you couldn't

Now run back to stormfront to try and get a good counter argument

 

[IM2]

Yeah, WHITEY BAD. I get it. Therefore you are absolved from any responsibility, or accountability for your own situation. It is ALL Whitey's fault. Carry on.

All you do is blame blackie

The new South African government is turning their country into just another African Hell Hole. It will descend into tribal warfare with War Lords controlling and stealing everything.

Where did I mention RACE, or SKIN COLOR in my post you quoted? Please point that out.

It is ALL Whitey's fault.

You do it all the time. Learn what responsibility, or accountability for your own situation means before you talk.

Who is responsible for cleaning up the poorest streets in Detroit?

I know white people should reach out to these communities and hire the ones who apply for job if you think they can do the job. Economic opportunity is the solution. Most people want to work if it pays.

Better policing. More tax dollars. More business investment.

But what are the things blacks can do? Stop having kids you can’t afford. Stop treating the police like they are the enemy. Maybe move from this place that is poverty stricken. Lots of better places in America. Take school more seriously. Learn to speak English. Pull up your pants. Stop doing drugs etc.

I haven’t heard one black agree with one of these things.

Here is my question to blacks. Are they as a community doing anything right and is it all whiteys fault?

You have no suggestions to listen to. Because your suggestions are based on white sterotypes and do not reflect the reality within the black community.

“There are about 2.5 million black fathers living with their children and about 1.7 million living apart from them.”

Opinion | Black Dads Are Doing Best of All

But while the number of unmarried black women has substantially grown, the actual birthrate (measured by births per 1000) for black women is it the lowest point that its ever documented.*

Understanding Out-of-Wedlock Births in Black America - The Atlantic



Today’s young African Americans display the lowest rates of crime and serious risk of any generation that can be reliably assessed.

In the last 20 years in particular, the FBI reports, rates of crime among African American youth have plummeted: All offenses (down 47%), drug offenses (down 50%), property offenses (down 51%), serious Part I offenses (down 53%), assault (down 59%), robbery (down 60%), all violent offenses (down 60%), rape (down 66%), and murder (down 82%).

Why the Gigantic, Decades-Long Drop in Black Youth Crime Threatens Major Interests — Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice

These are some of the reasons why no one black agrees wth you.

We are doing the job.

In a 2010 article titled "Buying Black - the Ebony Experiment," author James Clingman Jr. wrote that $850 billion moves through black consumers' hands each year, but 90% of that amount goes to businesses owned or controlled by nonblacks.

Buying black: Too much money flows out of the black community

It is high time you white people, and this time I mean ALL WHITES, understand that when we ask whites for economic support that we are not asking whites for a handout. We are asking you to return some of the money WE SPEND WITH YOU in order to help us fix the problems whites created.

Don't ever ask me that question again.

 

[Correll]

The Ivy League schools are a group that has really good documentation on their level of discrimination in favor of blacks.

OK.

Name me an Ivy League school that let's black people with lower scores than whites ?

The study I have read on it, was of ALL the Ivy League schools, and showed that, as a whole they let in black students with far lower scores than white students.


As a whole.


I've discussed them many times on this site. Do you need a link, or do you already know it is true and you are just playing some silly game?

OK. So you can't name one Ivy league school that let's black people in with lower scores than whites.

Just as I thought.

AS A WHOLE. I did not read into the actual academic study to see if it broke it down by individual schools.


But as a whole, the group lets in blacks with lower scores.


Dude. If you pretend to not understand that, you are using the stupid defense to the nth degree. It will not look good on you.

Just tap out. Save face while you can. I asked you to name an Ivy school which let's blacks in with lower scores than whites but you couldn't

Now run back to stormfront to try and get a good counter argument

Dude. YOu look sad. You want to dig into the study to find a by school breakdown, ask for the link, and I will give it to you.


Pretending that I have not more than met your challenge, is making you look stupider than normal.

 

[katsteve2012]

Fertility rates are primarily driven by the amount of time females spend in education.

That a majority of white women go to college, cuts out best fertility years.

It is a problem. I don't blame black men for this of course, it is a problem caused by white liberals.

If they die. They die.

Nice non sequitur.


My point stands. This is a result of high levels of education, and I dont' blame it on black men, as you dishonestly claimed.


The solution, imo, is to fight against degree inflation, and accelerate education for brighter students, for starters.

I like to see companies are acknowledging their lack of diversity and considering this fact in their decisions when interviewing women and minorities.

Giving preference to women and minorities, because they are women or minorities, is discriminating against men and whites.


That is the exact opposite of "privilege", it is a literal handicap.


And as white men are now an actual minority in the work force, always be given an handicap, at every "opportunity"


is a good way to cause enormous harm to tens of millions of good people, for no good reason.

No statistic of any credibility supports the conspiracy theory that white males are "under siege".

Even at 31% of the American population, white males are represented in 72% of executive positions in the most visible Fortune 500 corporations in America.

By comparison to many minority males there is no workforce crisis for white males...especially in positions that control the monetary wealth of the country.

.There is a publicized spike in opioid use and suicide, which are both less of a risk with help from therapy. Other than that phenomena, there is no crisis.

 

[katsteve2012]

If they die. They die.

Nice non sequitur.


My point stands. This is a result of high levels of education, and I dont' blame it on black men, as you dishonestly claimed.


The solution, imo, is to fight against degree inflation, and accelerate education for brighter students, for starters.

I like to see companies are acknowledging their lack of diversity and considering this fact in their decisions when interviewing women and minorities.

Giving preference to women and minorities, because they are women or minorities, is discriminating against men and whites.


That is the exact opposite of "privilege", it is a literal handicap.


And as white men are now an actual minority in the work force, always be given an handicap, at every "opportunity"


is a good way to cause enormous harm to tens of millions of good people, for no good reason.

It what white males have been doing for centuries.

Actually, we've been discriminating in favor of blacks, and browns, and women, increasingly, for generations now.


When are liberals going to stop living in the past?


A 24 year old white male, fresh out of college, if he managed to finish, as so few do,


is unlikely to have any advantage from those past "centuries" of discrimination, and faces a workforce environment and a career where at every fucking point, his skin color and gender will be a minus for him, as employers, even if they are white and/or male, will be looking as always to make their organization more "diverse".


WHy do you want to fuck him, and his sons? DO they really deserve that?


What will you do, when they get tired of being fucked, and get angry?

Wh

A "generation" is normally considered to be approximately 25 years.

Assuming that you are referring to AA, whice was signed into effect around 1964, that is barely 2 generations, which means there are minorities living now who's families
were affected by lack of access to equal opportunity for far more than 2 generation.


Do you actually believe that the very minute that AA was signed into effect that white males began to suffer?


As we often read here, "It was white Republican males who supported civil rights and equality for all"

Being the "kind hearted, forward thinking, humanitariun, white republican males that they were, why would they sign anything into law that would do more harm than to just equalize over 150 years of second class citizenship experienced by some?

 

[Correll]

Fertility rates are primarily driven by the amount of time females spend in education.

That a majority of white women go to college, cuts out best fertility years.

It is a problem. I don't blame black men for this of course, it is a problem caused by white liberals.

If they die. They die.

Nice non sequitur.


My point stands. This is a result of high levels of education, and I dont' blame it on black men, as you dishonestly claimed.


The solution, imo, is to fight against degree inflation, and accelerate education for brighter students, for starters.

I like to see companies are acknowledging their lack of diversity and considering this fact in their decisions when interviewing women and minorities.

Giving preference to women and minorities, because they are women or minorities, is discriminating against men and whites.


That is the exact opposite of "privilege", it is a literal handicap.


And as white men are now an actual minority in the work force, always be given an handicap, at every "opportunity"


is a good way to cause enormous harm to tens of millions of good people, for no good reason.

No statistic of any credibility supports the conspiracy theory that white males are "under siege".

Even at 31% of the American population, white males are represented in 72% of executive positions in the most visible Fortune 500 corporations in America.

By comparison to many minority males there is no workforce crisis for white males...especially in positions that control the monetary wealth of the country.

.There is a publicized spike in opioid use and suicide, which are both less of a risk with help from therapy. Other than that phenomena, there is no crisis.

Those CEO's are far, far, far more likely to pander to the Politically Correct power structure than to look out for their fellow white males.


Indeed, I have heard so many corporations talk smack about diversity and such shit, that I don't really hear it anymore, I tune it out.


But I have NEVER heard of any white male ceo, talk any shit about looking out for his fellow white men.


So, your number is irrelevant to my point about anti-white discrimination.

 

[Correll]

Nice non sequitur.


My point stands. This is a result of high levels of education, and I dont' blame it on black men, as you dishonestly claimed.


The solution, imo, is to fight against degree inflation, and accelerate education for brighter students, for starters.

I like to see companies are acknowledging their lack of diversity and considering this fact in their decisions when interviewing women and minorities.

Giving preference to women and minorities, because they are women or minorities, is discriminating against men and whites.


That is the exact opposite of "privilege", it is a literal handicap.


And as white men are now an actual minority in the work force, always be given an handicap, at every "opportunity"


is a good way to cause enormous harm to tens of millions of good people, for no good reason.

It what white males have been doing for centuries.

Actually, we've been discriminating in favor of blacks, and browns, and women, increasingly, for generations now.


When are liberals going to stop living in the past?


A 24 year old white male, fresh out of college, if he managed to finish, as so few do,


is unlikely to have any advantage from those past "centuries" of discrimination, and faces a workforce environment and a career where at every fucking point, his skin color and gender will be a minus for him, as employers, even if they are white and/or male, will be looking as always to make their organization more "diverse".


WHy do you want to fuck him, and his sons? DO they really deserve that?


What will you do, when they get tired of being fucked, and get angry?

Wh

A "generation" is normally considered to be approximately 25 years.

Assuming that you are referring to AA, whice was signed into effect around 1964, that is barely 2 generations, which means there are minorities living now who's families
were affected by lack of access to equal opportunity for far more than 2 generation.


Do you actually believe that the very minute that AA was signed into effect that white males began to suffer?


As we often read here, "It was white Republican males who supported civil rights and equality for all"

Being the "kind hearted, forward thinking, humanitariun, white republican males that they were, why would they sign anything into law that would do more harm than to just equalize over 150 years of second class citizenship experienced by some?

1. Before I was born, though my whole life, and looking to continue all though the life of my child, likely to be increasing as demographic shift empowers "minorities" even more. That's a long time to me.

2. You show me an elderly black man, who had to deal with real discrimination AGAINST him in his youth, and I will be more tolerant of any complains HE has. Though, in my experience, they are pretty happy to be treated with EQUALITY.

3. Because they did not foresee how it would grow, and be used against their descendants.

 

[katsteve2012]

If they die. They die.

Nice non sequitur.


My point stands. This is a result of high levels of education, and I dont' blame it on black men, as you dishonestly claimed.


The solution, imo, is to fight against degree inflation, and accelerate education for brighter students, for starters.

I like to see companies are acknowledging their lack of diversity and considering this fact in their decisions when interviewing women and minorities.

Giving preference to women and minorities, because they are women or minorities, is discriminating against men and whites.


That is the exact opposite of "privilege", it is a literal handicap.


And as white men are now an actual minority in the work force, always be given an handicap, at every "opportunity"


is a good way to cause enormous harm to tens of millions of good people, for no good reason.

No statistic of any credibility supports the conspiracy theory that white males are "under siege".

Even at 31% of the American population, white males are represented in 72% of executive positions in the most visible Fortune 500 corporations in America.

By comparison to many minority males there is no workforce crisis for white males...especially in positions that control the monetary wealth of the country.

.There is a publicized spike in opioid use and suicide, which are both less of a risk with help from therapy. Other than that phenomena, there is no crisis.

Those CEO's are far, far, far more likely to pander to the Politically Correct power structure than to look out for their fellow white males.


Indeed, I have heard so many corporations talk smack about diversity and such shit, that I don't really hear it anymore, I tune it out.


But I have NEVER heard of any white male ceo, talk any shit about looking out for his fellow white men.


So, your number is irrelevant to my point about anti-white discrimination.

It is quite relevant. Because beneath the CEO's the vast majority of 2nd and 3rd tier executives as well as mid level managers on any organizational chart are predominately white males as well.

Just where do presume the successors to todays CEO's and company presidents come from?


So yes, they do generally hire and promote to reflect face of the company. That is an undeniable fact.

As far as "white male ceos publically talking shit, as you say about looking out for his fellow white man", you cant be serious.

That would not be wise....publically. And any CEO who is smart, has to consider public And that includes taking responsibility for a public perception of supporting diversity. That does not prevent them from privately helping their "fellow white man."


There is no anti white discrimination.

 

[Correll]

Nice non sequitur.


My point stands. This is a result of high levels of education, and I dont' blame it on black men, as you dishonestly claimed.


The solution, imo, is to fight against degree inflation, and accelerate education for brighter students, for starters.

I like to see companies are acknowledging their lack of diversity and considering this fact in their decisions when interviewing women and minorities.

Giving preference to women and minorities, because they are women or minorities, is discriminating against men and whites.


That is the exact opposite of "privilege", it is a literal handicap.


And as white men are now an actual minority in the work force, always be given an handicap, at every "opportunity"


is a good way to cause enormous harm to tens of millions of good people, for no good reason.

No statistic of any credibility supports the conspiracy theory that white males are "under siege".

Even at 31% of the American population, white males are represented in 72% of executive positions in the most visible Fortune 500 corporations in America.

By comparison to many minority males there is no workforce crisis for white males...especially in positions that control the monetary wealth of the country.

.There is a publicized spike in opioid use and suicide, which are both less of a risk with help from therapy. Other than that phenomena, there is no crisis.

Those CEO's are far, far, far more likely to pander to the Politically Correct power structure than to look out for their fellow white males.


Indeed, I have heard so many corporations talk smack about diversity and such shit, that I don't really hear it anymore, I tune it out.


But I have NEVER heard of any white male ceo, talk any shit about looking out for his fellow white men.


So, your number is irrelevant to my point about anti-white discrimination.

It is quite relevant. Because beneath the CEO's the vast majority of 2nd and 3rd tier executives as well as mid level managers on any organizational chart are predominately white males as well.

Just where do presume the successors to todays CEO's and company presidents come from?


So yes, they do generally hire and promote to reflect face of the company. That is an undeniable fact.

As far as "white male ceos publically talking shit, as you say about looking out for his fellow white man", you cant be serious.

That would not be wise....publically. And any CEO who is smart, has to consider public And that includes taking responsibility for a public perception of supporting diversity. That does not prevent them from privately helping their "fellow white man."

1. A few top slots are irrelevant. NO matter what, very few people will get those jobs. And if all the people who have them, are sociopathic assholes, then it does not matter what their skin color is, they will not be looking out for their fellow white men.


2. They do not. AA, diversity programs, seek to pander to the concepts of Political Correctness. Upper management, doesn't give a damn about the work and file.


3. It does prevent them from helping their fellow white men. Such discrimination has been documented many times. Your denial is because you support discrimination in favor of your people.

 

[katsteve2012]

I like to see companies are acknowledging their lack of diversity and considering this fact in their decisions when interviewing women and minorities.

Giving preference to women and minorities, because they are women or minorities, is discriminating against men and whites.


That is the exact opposite of "privilege", it is a literal handicap.


And as white men are now an actual minority in the work force, always be given an handicap, at every "opportunity"


is a good way to cause enormous harm to tens of millions of good people, for no good reason.

It what white males have been doing for centuries.

Actually, we've been discriminating in favor of blacks, and browns, and women, increasingly, for generations now.


When are liberals going to stop living in the past?


A 24 year old white male, fresh out of college, if he managed to finish, as so few do,


is unlikely to have any advantage from those past "centuries" of discrimination, and faces a workforce environment and a career where at every fucking point, his skin color and gender will be a minus for him, as employers, even if they are white and/or male, will be looking as always to make their organization more "diverse".


WHy do you want to fuck him, and his sons? DO they really deserve that?


What will you do, when they get tired of being fucked, and get angry?

Wh

A "generation" is normally considered to be approximately 25 years.

Assuming that you are referring to AA, whice was signed into effect around 1964, that is barely 2 generations, which means there are minorities living now who's families
were affected by lack of access to equal opportunity for far more than 2 generation.


Do you actually believe that the very minute that AA was signed into effect that white males began to suffer?


As we often read here, "It was white Republican males who supported civil rights and equality for all"

Being the "kind hearted, forward thinking, humanitariun, white republican males that they were, why would they sign anything into law that would do more harm than to just equalize over 150 years of second class citizenship experienced by some?

1. Before I was born, though my whole life, and looking to continue all though the life of my child, likely to be increasing as demographic shift empowers "minorities" even more. That's a long time to me.

2. You show me an elderly black man, who had to deal with real discrimination AGAINST him in his youth, and I will be more tolerant of any complains HE has. Though, in my experience, they are pretty happy to be treated with EQUALITY.

3. Because they did not foresee how it would grow, and be used against their descendants.

There are a vast number of black men and women who have yet to reach 70 that witnessed real discrimination, who also have still living relatives who experienced it.

 

[Correll]

Giving preference to women and minorities, because they are women or minorities, is discriminating against men and whites.


That is the exact opposite of "privilege", it is a literal handicap.


And as white men are now an actual minority in the work force, always be given an handicap, at every "opportunity"


is a good way to cause enormous harm to tens of millions of good people, for no good reason.

It what white males have been doing for centuries.

Actually, we've been discriminating in favor of blacks, and browns, and women, increasingly, for generations now.


When are liberals going to stop living in the past?


A 24 year old white male, fresh out of college, if he managed to finish, as so few do,


is unlikely to have any advantage from those past "centuries" of discrimination, and faces a workforce environment and a career where at every fucking point, his skin color and gender will be a minus for him, as employers, even if they are white and/or male, will be looking as always to make their organization more "diverse".


WHy do you want to fuck him, and his sons? DO they really deserve that?


What will you do, when they get tired of being fucked, and get angry?

Wh

A "generation" is normally considered to be approximately 25 years.

Assuming that you are referring to AA, whice was signed into effect around 1964, that is barely 2 generations, which means there are minorities living now who's families
were affected by lack of access to equal opportunity for far more than 2 generation.


Do you actually believe that the very minute that AA was signed into effect that white males began to suffer?


As we often read here, "It was white Republican males who supported civil rights and equality for all"

Being the "kind hearted, forward thinking, humanitariun, white republican males that they were, why would they sign anything into law that would do more harm than to just equalize over 150 years of second class citizenship experienced by some?

1. Before I was born, though my whole life, and looking to continue all though the life of my child, likely to be increasing as demographic shift empowers "minorities" even more. That's a long time to me.

2. You show me an elderly black man, who had to deal with real discrimination AGAINST him in his youth, and I will be more tolerant of any complains HE has. Though, in my experience, they are pretty happy to be treated with EQUALITY.

3. Because they did not foresee how it would grow, and be used against their descendants.

There are a vast number of black men and women who have yet to reach 70 that witnessed real discrimination, who also have still living relatives who experienced it.

And that justifies discrimination against whites now, how?

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

1) The US supreme court is making it even easier for the cops to kill black people. That's all these laws about. Now sure, they don't mind a few white people getting caught in the crossfire, but essentially these laws are about killing or harming black people

2) What would have happened if he was black ?

A white man points gun at Cops. They Ask Him to Stand Down. He Shoots at them. They ask him to stand Down again. He refuses again and fights With Cops. But he is taken alive

What would have happened if he was black ?

What would have happened if he was black ?

What would have happened if he was black ?

3) You know how white supremacist love to lie about "Were helping black people. Look at all this aid we give"

Yeah a bag of rice for a bag of diamonds.

This is an old mafia trick. The mafia used to kill a wife's husband then a week later, show up at her house with a envelope of money telling her "What a great guy he was". White supremacists acts of aggression are always followed by white supremacist acts of compassion. You must keep the victims confused.

But this is what the Red cross is doing haiti. Child Sex rings etc. They've found 21 cases of sexual misconduct in last three years but of course keep digging and the real number is in the thousands. Not that the money was ever meant to go to Haiti.

Once again. White supremacists have history.

This is happening to black/African ppl globally. British soldiers that were forcing the poverty stricken African women and underage girls to have sex with them in exchange for food and clean water.

3) Screen writer of the original Planet of The Apes says the film was about about Black people

Now watch how quickly this post will get locked.

To the mods black people talking about racism on a section of a forum that's dedicated to racism is race baiting.

Because in USMB if you talk about racism then you must focus on how screwed up, violent or dumb black people supposedly are anything else is race baiting.

Don't pull a gun on cops. Problem solved. or Pull a gun on cops and scream racism. I guess you could choose either one. I recommend the first one.

I was going to suggest you take a look at the first post in this thread but when I clicked on reply, the computer brought up the first post as part of your comment, so apparently you have seen it.

What about the white people displayed who pulled guns on the police and did not die?

 

[katsteve2012]

I like to see companies are acknowledging their lack of diversity and considering this fact in their decisions when interviewing women and minorities.

Giving preference to women and minorities, because they are women or minorities, is discriminating against men and whites.


That is the exact opposite of "privilege", it is a literal handicap.


And as white men are now an actual minority in the work force, always be given an handicap, at every "opportunity"


is a good way to cause enormous harm to tens of millions of good people, for no good reason.

No statistic of any credibility supports the conspiracy theory that white males are "under siege".

Even at 31% of the American population, white males are represented in 72% of executive positions in the most visible Fortune 500 corporations in America.

By comparison to many minority males there is no workforce crisis for white males...especially in positions that control the monetary wealth of the country.

.There is a publicized spike in opioid use and suicide, which are both less of a risk with help from therapy. Other than that phenomena, there is no crisis.

Those CEO's are far, far, far more likely to pander to the Politically Correct power structure than to look out for their fellow white males.


Indeed, I have heard so many corporations talk smack about diversity and such shit, that I don't really hear it anymore, I tune it out.


But I have NEVER heard of any white male ceo, talk any shit about looking out for his fellow white men.


So, your number is irrelevant to my point about anti-white discrimination.

It is quite relevant. Because beneath the CEO's the vast majority of 2nd and 3rd tier executives as well as mid level managers on any organizational chart are predominately white males as well.

Just where do presume the successors to todays CEO's and company presidents come from?


So yes, they do generally hire and promote to reflect face of the company. That is an undeniable fact.

As far as "white male ceos publically talking shit, as you say about looking out for his fellow white man", you cant be serious.

That would not be wise....publically. And any CEO who is smart, has to consider public And that includes taking responsibility for a public perception of supporting diversity. That does not prevent them from privately helping their "fellow white man."

1. A few top slots are irrelevant. NO matter what, very few people will get those jobs. And if all the people who have them, are sociopathic assholes, then it does not matter what their skin color is, they will not be looking out for their fellow white men.


2. They do not. AA, diversity programs, seek to pander to the concepts of Political Correctness. Upper management, doesn't give a damn about the work and file.


3. It does prevent them from helping their fellow white men. Such discrimination has been documented many times. Your denial is because you support discrimination in favor of your people.

1. "A few top slots"? 72% of the top positions is in fact quite relevant, and is way more than just "a few". When you are speaking about the top 25 fortune 500 companies in the country, that is significant. And regardless of what you believe about the "work and file" being victims, the fact remains that majority of the next several levels beneath most CEO's are pedominately white males.

2. The vast majority of AA and diversity programs benefit white females far than any other demographic, which in turn, utimately benefits household average income, and therefore benefits white males as well.

3. There is no discrimination against white males. They still in every catagory are overrepresented in leadership positions in the workforce and make the majority of the hiring decisions in the workforce. Thats just a fact.

One last thing, trying to convince me that I support discrimination that does not even exist, is noted and dismissed as ridiculous. I'm retired so I don't have a dog in the fight. You are just being told how it is.


There is no anti white discrimination.

 

[Correll]

Giving preference to women and minorities, because they are women or minorities, is discriminating against men and whites.


That is the exact opposite of "privilege", it is a literal handicap.


And as white men are now an actual minority in the work force, always be given an handicap, at every "opportunity"


is a good way to cause enormous harm to tens of millions of good people, for no good reason.

No statistic of any credibility supports the conspiracy theory that white males are "under siege".

Even at 31% of the American population, white males are represented in 72% of executive positions in the most visible Fortune 500 corporations in America.

By comparison to many minority males there is no workforce crisis for white males...especially in positions that control the monetary wealth of the country.

.There is a publicized spike in opioid use and suicide, which are both less of a risk with help from therapy. Other than that phenomena, there is no crisis.

Those CEO's are far, far, far more likely to pander to the Politically Correct power structure than to look out for their fellow white males.


Indeed, I have heard so many corporations talk smack about diversity and such shit, that I don't really hear it anymore, I tune it out.


But I have NEVER heard of any white male ceo, talk any shit about looking out for his fellow white men.


So, your number is irrelevant to my point about anti-white discrimination.

It is quite relevant. Because beneath the CEO's the vast majority of 2nd and 3rd tier executives as well as mid level managers on any organizational chart are predominately white males as well.

Just where do presume the successors to todays CEO's and company presidents come from?


So yes, they do generally hire and promote to reflect face of the company. That is an undeniable fact.

As far as "white male ceos publically talking shit, as you say about looking out for his fellow white man", you cant be serious.

That would not be wise....publically. And any CEO who is smart, has to consider public And that includes taking responsibility for a public perception of supporting diversity. That does not prevent them from privately helping their "fellow white man."

1. A few top slots are irrelevant. NO matter what, very few people will get those jobs. And if all the people who have them, are sociopathic assholes, then it does not matter what their skin color is, they will not be looking out for their fellow white men.


2. They do not. AA, diversity programs, seek to pander to the concepts of Political Correctness. Upper management, doesn't give a damn about the work and file.


3. It does prevent them from helping their fellow white men. Such discrimination has been documented many times. Your denial is because you support discrimination in favor of your people.

1. "A few top slots"? 72% of the top positions is in fact quite relevant, and is way more than just "a few". When you are speaking about the top 25 fortune 500 companies in the country, that is significant. And regardless of what you believe about the "work and file" being victims, the fact remains that majority of the next several levels beneath most CEO's are pedominately white males.

2. The vast majority of AA and diversity programs benefit white females far than any other demographic, which in turn, utimately benefits household average income, and therefore benefits white males as well.

3. There is no discrimination against white males. They still in every catagory are overrepresented in leadership positions in the workforce and make the majority of the hiring decisions in the workforce. Thats just a fact.

One last thing, trying to convince me that I support discrimination that does not even exist, is noted and dismissed as ridiculous. I'm retired so I don't have a dog in the fight. You are just being told how it is.


There is no anti white discrimination.

1. Yes, very few top slots. There are very few of them. Very few people are effected.

2. Link to support your claim that the "vast majority" of benefit from AA and diversity programs goes to white females.

3. Your inability to understand that discrimination can take place and you can still have countervailing unequal outcomes, is a reflection of your ideological commitment to equal outcomes, not equal opportunity.

4. YOur support of anti-White discrimination is plain to see.

 

[katsteve2012]

It what white males have been doing for centuries.

Actually, we've been discriminating in favor of blacks, and browns, and women, increasingly, for generations now.


When are liberals going to stop living in the past?


A 24 year old white male, fresh out of college, if he managed to finish, as so few do,


is unlikely to have any advantage from those past "centuries" of discrimination, and faces a workforce environment and a career where at every fucking point, his skin color and gender will be a minus for him, as employers, even if they are white and/or male, will be looking as always to make their organization more "diverse".


WHy do you want to fuck him, and his sons? DO they really deserve that?


What will you do, when they get tired of being fucked, and get angry?

Wh

A "generation" is normally considered to be approximately 25 years.

Assuming that you are referring to AA, whice was signed into effect around 1964, that is barely 2 generations, which means there are minorities living now who's families
were affected by lack of access to equal opportunity for far more than 2 generation.


Do you actually believe that the very minute that AA was signed into effect that white males began to suffer?


As we often read here, "It was white Republican males who supported civil rights and equality for all"

Being the "kind hearted, forward thinking, humanitariun, white republican males that they were, why would they sign anything into law that would do more harm than to just equalize over 150 years of second class citizenship experienced by some?

1. Before I was born, though my whole life, and looking to continue all though the life of my child, likely to be increasing as demographic shift empowers "minorities" even more. That's a long time to me.

2. You show me an elderly black man, who had to deal with real discrimination AGAINST him in his youth, and I will be more tolerant of any complains HE has. Though, in my experience, they are pretty happy to be treated with EQUALITY.

3. Because they did not foresee how it would grow, and be used against their descendants.

There are a vast number of black men and women who have yet to reach 70 that witnessed real discrimination, who also have still living relatives who experienced it.

And that justifies discrimination against whites now, how?

You are the one who stated that you would listen to any elderly black person that experienced discrimination. I only pointed out that they are out there in abundance.

On the otherl hand, there is no metric that exists that proves through measuring employment, home ownership, average salary or college graduation rates that reflect any widescale discrimination against white citizens that has had a widespread effect on a national basis.

 

[katsteve2012]

No statistic of any credibility supports the conspiracy theory that white males are "under siege".

Even at 31% of the American population, white males are represented in 72% of executive positions in the most visible Fortune 500 corporations in America.

By comparison to many minority males there is no workforce crisis for white males...especially in positions that control the monetary wealth of the country.

.There is a publicized spike in opioid use and suicide, which are both less of a risk with help from therapy. Other than that phenomena, there is no crisis.

Those CEO's are far, far, far more likely to pander to the Politically Correct power structure than to look out for their fellow white males.


Indeed, I have heard so many corporations talk smack about diversity and such shit, that I don't really hear it anymore, I tune it out.


But I have NEVER heard of any white male ceo, talk any shit about looking out for his fellow white men.


So, your number is irrelevant to my point about anti-white discrimination.

It is quite relevant. Because beneath the CEO's the vast majority of 2nd and 3rd tier executives as well as mid level managers on any organizational chart are predominately white males as well.

Just where do presume the successors to todays CEO's and company presidents come from?


So yes, they do generally hire and promote to reflect face of the company. That is an undeniable fact.

As far as "white male ceos publically talking shit, as you say about looking out for his fellow white man", you cant be serious.

That would not be wise....publically. And any CEO who is smart, has to consider public And that includes taking responsibility for a public perception of supporting diversity. That does not prevent them from privately helping their "fellow white man."

1. A few top slots are irrelevant. NO matter what, very few people will get those jobs. And if all the people who have them, are sociopathic assholes, then it does not matter what their skin color is, they will not be looking out for their fellow white men.


2. They do not. AA, diversity programs, seek to pander to the concepts of Political Correctness. Upper management, doesn't give a damn about the work and file.


3. It does prevent them from helping their fellow white men. Such discrimination has been documented many times. Your denial is because you support discrimination in favor of your people.

1. "A few top slots"? 72% of the top positions is in fact quite relevant, and is way more than just "a few". When you are speaking about the top 25 fortune 500 companies in the country, that is significant. And regardless of what you believe about the "work and file" being victims, the fact remains that majority of the next several levels beneath most CEO's are pedominately white males.

2. The vast majority of AA and diversity programs benefit white females far than any other demographic, which in turn, utimately benefits household average income, and therefore benefits white males as well.

3. There is no discrimination against white males. They still in every catagory are overrepresented in leadership positions in the workforce and make the majority of the hiring decisions in the workforce. Thats just a fact.

One last thing, trying to convince me that I support discrimination that does not even exist, is noted and dismissed as ridiculous. I'm retired so I don't have a dog in the fight. You are just being told how it is.


There is no anti white discrimination.

1. Yes, very few top slots. There are very few of them. Very few people are effected.

2. Link to support your claim that the "vast majority" of benefit from AA and diversity programs goes to white females.

3. Your inability to understand that discrimination can take place and you can still have countervailing unequal outcomes, is a reflection of your ideological commitment to equal outcomes, not equal opportunity.

4. YOur support of anti-White discrimination is plain to see.

1. Yes. Many people are affected. White males hold not only the very top positions but also the next several positions in line are occupied. Your "fellow white men" are normally overrepresented based on nepotism and cronyism, based on their relative population size.

So, yes. Outcomes are in fact very unequeal if you compare the population size of white males to positions held in the workforce....even in non managerial jobs. And it is to their benefif.


2. Google is your friend as well as mine. Type in the search field "who benefits most from AA.

I've posted links to that in this forum countless times. Its your turn now.

3. I told you before, that your insisting that I support a form of discrimination that is nonexistext is ridiculous and dismissed.

 

[Correll]

Actually, we've been discriminating in favor of blacks, and browns, and women, increasingly, for generations now.


When are liberals going to stop living in the past?


A 24 year old white male, fresh out of college, if he managed to finish, as so few do,


is unlikely to have any advantage from those past "centuries" of discrimination, and faces a workforce environment and a career where at every fucking point, his skin color and gender will be a minus for him, as employers, even if they are white and/or male, will be looking as always to make their organization more "diverse".


WHy do you want to fuck him, and his sons? DO they really deserve that?


What will you do, when they get tired of being fucked, and get angry?

Wh

A "generation" is normally considered to be approximately 25 years.

Assuming that you are referring to AA, whice was signed into effect around 1964, that is barely 2 generations, which means there are minorities living now who's families
were affected by lack of access to equal opportunity for far more than 2 generation.


Do you actually believe that the very minute that AA was signed into effect that white males began to suffer?


As we often read here, "It was white Republican males who supported civil rights and equality for all"

Being the "kind hearted, forward thinking, humanitariun, white republican males that they were, why would they sign anything into law that would do more harm than to just equalize over 150 years of second class citizenship experienced by some?

1. Before I was born, though my whole life, and looking to continue all though the life of my child, likely to be increasing as demographic shift empowers "minorities" even more. That's a long time to me.

2. You show me an elderly black man, who had to deal with real discrimination AGAINST him in his youth, and I will be more tolerant of any complains HE has. Though, in my experience, they are pretty happy to be treated with EQUALITY.

3. Because they did not foresee how it would grow, and be used against their descendants.

There are a vast number of black men and women who have yet to reach 70 that witnessed real discrimination, who also have still living relatives who experienced it.

And that justifies discrimination against whites now, how?

You are the one who stated that you would listen to any elderly black person that experienced discrimination. I only pointed out that they are out there in abundance.

On the otherl hand, there is no metric that exists that proves through measuring employment, home ownership, average salary or college graduation rates that reflect any widescale discrimination against white citizens that has had a widespread effect on a national basis.

1. And I stated that I have found that such elderly black people are pretty happy just being treated as equals, and don't seem to need nor expect, nor want, special favoritism based on their being black.

2. ONE small limited example, of hard evidence of documented discrimination is the discrimination show in Ivy League admissions.

 

[sealybobo]

If they die. They die.

Nice non sequitur.


My point stands. This is a result of high levels of education, and I dont' blame it on black men, as you dishonestly claimed.


The solution, imo, is to fight against degree inflation, and accelerate education for brighter students, for starters.

I like to see companies are acknowledging their lack of diversity and considering this fact in their decisions when interviewing women and minorities.

Giving preference to women and minorities, because they are women or minorities, is discriminating against men and whites.


That is the exact opposite of "privilege", it is a literal handicap.


And as white men are now an actual minority in the work force, always be given an handicap, at every "opportunity"


is a good way to cause enormous harm to tens of millions of good people, for no good reason.

It what white males have been doing for centuries.

Actually, we've been discriminating in favor of blacks, and browns, and women, increasingly, for generations now.


When are liberals going to stop living in the past?


A 24 year old white male, fresh out of college, if he managed to finish, as so few do,


is unlikely to have any advantage from those past "centuries" of discrimination, and faces a workforce environment and a career where at every fucking point, his skin color and gender will be a minus for him, as employers, even if they are white and/or male, will be looking as always to make their organization more "diverse".


WHy do you want to fuck him, and his sons? DO they really deserve that?


What will you do, when they get tired of being fucked, and get angry?

I’m one of them. I’m a white man 48. I look around and I see it’s a white mans world. Why couldn’t they have found a black controller? Or office manager. Or god forbid operations manager or president. At my company these are all white men. Poor us.

What will you white men do? Loot? Riot? Turn to violence? I thought you were better than that. You make fun of blacks who have enough and snap and now you’re admitting you’d get violent too if pushed like blacks have been pushed and discriminated against.

Funny though the girl I replaced sold $40k in aftermarket every month. I sell $181,000 a month.