University Report: A Room Full of White People Is a Microaggression

[rpfocus]

People who use the term "SJW" all pretty much come from stormfront. You are the same dorks using terms like "beta-cuck" and all that other silly little angry nazi wannabe terminology. You are the same dorks that are constantly getting banned only to re-appear with a new account a few weeks later.

And EVEN if you were a new person every time, you all say the same shit, speak about the same damn few authors, and use the same micro-jingos and sayings.... ...your root is clear.

I see your posts all over news stories comment sections too. You always say the same stupid garbage.... ...because your ideology can't work if you think for yourself.


....and at it's core, it is racism, pure and simple. Stupid.... Fucking... racism.


"SJW" "Alinksy" "anti-racist is anti-white" "betacuck" <<--- lol!

recently, some little nazi completely dribbled all over himself here while talking about race being the reason African civilizations were never great.

You guys are stupid.

Quoted For Truth

 

[europa arise]

Meh. Your "message" is the same regurgitated garbage your sock puppet predecessors have been spewing, and race-bait threads are your sole purpose for being here, judging by your collective activity. Apparently, a small group of racist (yes, racist) dipshit nincompoops have seemingly chosen RPF as a platform to advance their agenda. I propose that the mods create a "Race Bait" section of the forum so that "US Political News" doesn't become filled with your special brand of idiocy, as it's clear that's where we're headed.

You are a snot nosed, foaming at the mouth child who is incapable of having an adult conversation. Maybe it is you who needs to go away (far far away, off to never never land) so the adults can deal with life's complex realities. Tell Tinkerbell I said hello.

 

[ThePaleoLibertarian]

I guess my hangup is over 'pro-white' and 'anti-feminist'. Is that pro-white, with the exclusion of others based on race? Or is it pro-white, as in a backlash to the 'reverse racism' (racism) we see today?

Pro-white as in I value the continuation and preservation of white genetics, white culture and white civilization. When given the option, people tend to gravitate toward people of their own race, so I think free association will take care of that quite readily. I encourage everyone to love their race, regardless of what it is.

Same with anti feminist; do you mean that men and women should no have equal rights and opportunities, or are you against the modern feminist movement, which in many respects has gone radical?

I think men and women are different, and serve complimentary roles in a functional civilization (hence the term "complimentarism" as opposed to egalitarianism). Traditional gender roles exist for a reason, and should not be pathologically torn down by a bunch of cultural Marxists. I don't think there should be any barriers to entry keeping women from working, but in a civilization worth living in, most women would be taking care of the family and the household.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

So I suppose when I visit Japan, and am surrounded by Japanese people, they are inflicting a micro aggression on me? Should I be eligable for free therapy?

 

[juleswin]

So I suppose when I visit Japan, and am surrounded by Japanese people, they are inflicting a micro aggression on me? Should I be eligable for free therapy?

The problem with this kind of article is that it in a way misrepresents the characters of the people featured in it. I have read the article a few times now and no where it in did it show the non whites who were uncomfortable in a room full of whites believed they were micro aggressed by anyone. No where did it present evidence that the student feeling uncomfortable demanded any accommodation or therapy of any kind. But just about half the response from the people who read it came out thinking these people are demanding therapy money, somehow blaming white people or thought it was microaggression.

People tend to feel uncomfortable in the first day of school anyway and as the semester wears on, they get more comfortable and familiar with their classmates. This is not a new phenomena, its not abnormal and it doesn't only happen with white people. It just turns out that the vast majority of college students are white people, so more people when asked will report being uncomfortable around white students. This is not a good or bad thing for anyone involved. Its rather a thing people go through in life and learn from.

You have every right to feel however you want in Japan, just don't complain about it or expect them to bend over backward for free.

Also, colored when referring to skin color refers to the skin pigment. White people are born with very little of it and produce very little compared to colored races. Hence the reason why they say people of color i.e. people with pigments. Its really not that complicated.

Now I have to tell a joke after this.
Newspaper headline reads "Cartoonist found dead at home" ...Details very sketchy

 

[jonhowe]

I think men and women are different, and serve complimentary roles in a functional civilization (hence the term "complimentarism" as opposed to egalitarianism). Traditional gender roles exist for a reason, and should not be pathologically torn down by a bunch of cultural Marxists. I don't think there should be any barriers to entry keeping women from working, but in a civilization worth living in, most women would be taking care of the family and the household.

Traditional gender roles exist for a reason, but that doesn't mean it's a good one. We'll have to agree to disagree here, but I assure you I am not a "cultural Marxist". I think empowering woman, rather than encouraging subservience (those traditional roles), increases freedom and prosperity.

But since neither of us is in favor of enforcing gender roles using government violence, I see no problem disagreeing here.

 

[HankRicther12]

Traditional gender roles exist for a reason, but that doesn't mean it's a good one. We'll have to agree to disagree here, but I assure you I am not a "cultural Marxist". I think empowering woman, rather than encouraging subservience (those traditional roles), increases freedom and prosperity.

But since neither of us is in favor of enforcing gender roles using government violence, I see no problem disagreeing here.

You use those phrases yet claim you're not a cultural marxist? I really would like you to come to my town and I'll introduce you to several women who are homemakers, I want you to tell them what they do is "subservient" I want you to tell them they don't have a real job, tell them they are not "empowered" and that caring for their kids somehow makes them less than a woman who goes out into the work force.

You most definitely are a cultural marxist if you believe caring for your home and children is subservience. It is a very difficult job, and yes, IT IS a job, and not only difficult but very important. I think it's sad you hold so little regard for parents who stay home and care for their children rather than dropping them off at some daycare center. Most men in traditional roles do not leave the home every day to go out and let the good times role, they do so to earn a living to provide for their families.

 

[JustinTime]

The whole story about "microaggression" was a microaggression against white people...

I'm not worried about microagressions of any kind.

I am worried about real aggression. Real murder. Real wars.

Not insults and stupid people's blogs.

Get a grip, losers.

You're not worried about this professors blog, but you sure are worried about the posts in this thread.

 

[JustinTime]

You use those phrases yet claim you're not a cultural marxist? I really would like you to come to my town and I'll introduce you to several women who are homemakers, I want you to tell them what they do is "subservient" I want you to tell them they don't have a real job, tell them they are not "empowered" and that caring for their kids somehow makes them less than a woman who goes out into the work force.

You most definitely are a cultural marxist if you believe caring for your home and children is subservience. It is a very difficult job, and yes, IT IS a job, and not only difficult but very important. I think it's sad you hold so little regard for parents who stay home and care for their children rather than dropping them off at some daycare center. Most men in traditional roles do not leave the home every day to go out and let the good times role, they do so to earn a living to provide for their families.

Mocking and portraying motherhood and childrearing as subservience or subjugation of women was cooked up to get mothers away for a while and let the state grab greater power over the little skulls full of mush and raise them to be, surprise surprise, subservient and subjugated.

Its a process still going on today, take the debate over spanking, they wont rest until they have total power over every child, which means mom and dad have none, and its always done under the guise of fighting for someones rights.

Like I said before, understanding Cultural Marxism is crucial and sadly most people just don't get it.

 

[juleswin]

Mocking and portraying motherhood and childrearing as subservience or subjugation of women was cooked up to get mothers away for a while and let the state grab greater power over the little skulls full of mush and raise them to be, surprise surprise, subservient and subjugated.

Its a process still going on today, take the debate over spanking, they wont rest until they have total power over every child.

Like I said before, understanding Cultural Marxism is crucial and sadly most people just don't get it.

That is true and I also heard that the folks who invented the disposable diaper, microwave, the washing machine, dish washer etc etc that made homemaking a lot easier where in collusion with the cultural Marxists in order to take women away from the home. Its all about taking women away from the home instead of the fact that the world has changed a lot since civil society emerged and gender roles cannot remain static while evrything around it changes

 

[JustinTime]

That is true and I also heard that the folks who invented the disposable diaper, microwave, the washing machine, dish washer etc etc that made homemaking a lot easier where in collusion with the cultural Marxists in order to take women away from the home.

That stuff would give stay at home moms more time with the kids, none of it would take them away from them.

Its all about taking women away from the home instead of the fact that the world has changed a lot since civil society emerged and gender roles cannot remain static while evrything around it changes

Says who?

 

[smokemonsc]

So much bullshit in this thread.

I want to live in a society where men and women are free to pursue their life's goals in whatever pursuits that entails. I think cultures that don't allow for this choice are evil. I think cultures that have traditional roles, as long as they are voluntary and not coerced, are fine. Does this make me a cultural marxist?

I want to live in a society where the individual is treated with respect. Does this make me a cultural marxist?

I want to live in a society where the individual is treated equally under the law, not where the law is applied to ensure the equality of outcomes. Does this make me a cultural marxist?

I think some cultures are shit because they want the opposite of what I want. Does this make me a racist?

I think some people are superior to others because of what they've done, accomplished, think, and DO. Does this make me a racist, cultural marxist, or evil?

I think some people are evil for the same reasons listed above. What term do you have for people like me?






Please say extremist

-Smoke

 

[parocks]

I would say you need to look into the topic more. If you don't honestly see how Straight, White, (Christian) Males are under attack in Western Society you are just blind. Sure, this particular article might not be making huge headlines but are you saying you miss all these things with bakers and florists? The Duke Rape Case, this recent Rolling Stone fiasco?

It is crazy to me how so many RP supporters, libertarians, anarchists, etc see clearly the leftist-marxism on the economic front yet completely ignore it on the social front, and if you even try to bring it their attention they immediately whip out the same ole Alinsky tactics to try and shut down any conversation about it.

Well, you're right, but this isn't as much the socon board.

 

[europa arise]

The problem with this kind of article is that it in a way misrepresents the characters of the people featured in it. I have read the article a few times now and no where it in did it show the non whites who were uncomfortable in a room full of whites believed they were micro aggressed by anyone.

Racial Microaggressions Research Project's report

In one of my lecture classes, we were talking about something related to the Latino community. The TA called on me to explain what Latinos think of the issue since I am Latina, as if I am the voice of all Latinos. (Latina, Female)

Color-blind remarks, such as “When I look at you, I don’t see color” are demeaning refusals to acknowledge a person’s race. According to Sue et al. (2007) these statements are examples of microinvalidations, which are “verbal comments or behaviors that exclude, negate or nullify the psychological thoughts, feeling or experiential reality of a person of color”(p. 278). More broadly, the denial that racism or White privilege exists (or the insistence that a perceived racial microaggression is nonexistent) invalidates an actual experience of a person of color. Like microinsults, racial microinvalidations may also be unconscious.

racial microaggressions: microinsults, microinvalidations and microassaults.

http://www.racialmicroaggressions.illinois.edu/files/2015/03/RMA-Classroom-Report.pdf

 

[r3volution 3.0]

The problem with this kind of article is that it in a way misrepresents the characters of the people featured in it. I have read the article a few times now and no where it in did it show the non whites who were uncomfortable in a room full of whites believed they were micro aggressed by anyone. No where did it present evidence that the student feeling uncomfortable demanded any accommodation or therapy of any kind. But just about half the response from the people who read it came out thinking these people are demanding therapy money, somehow blaming white people or thought it was microaggression.

The article does not explicitly state that the non-whites who reported being micro-aggressed-against wanted anything (though one can infer that they did based on their choice to participate in the survey, assuming they knew what the survey was about).

In any event, whatever the students wanted, it's clear what the study organizers wanted.

the study still recommends that the school take drastic measures to stop them: requiring that all students complete a “General Education requirement about race, White privilege, and inequality in the United States” as well as “both a non-Western culture and a US people of color cultural course”; fundamentally altering the curriculum to ensure that a third of all college 101 classes “include diversity and inclusion”; providing workshops, trainings, campaigns, and brochures “to help students identify when racial microaggressions are occurring”; creating a “slogan or language” — such as the phrase “Racism Alert” — to use when they identify one; and developing a “mechanism for students to report perceived racial microaggressions.”

Now, having read that, I have to go vomit blood. Excuse me.

 

[parocks]

Not only that, but "people of color" is the new PC term, but "colored people" is still considered racist. Modernity is a cancer.

What year are all you from? Is "person of color" just coming to your attention?

 

[juleswin]

The article does not explicitly state that the non-whites who reported being micro-aggressed-against wanted anything (though one can infer that they did based on their choice to participate in the survey, assuming they knew what the survey was about).

In any event, whatever the students wanted, it's clear what the study organizers wanted.



Now, having read that, I have to go vomit blood. Excuse me.

I don't know where or what era you went to college. But nowadays, there are fliers in usually the arts and science building advertising surveys. Some of them pay you to participate, others are just put up by other students running some social experiment for some school project. I took a few surveys in my college stint and thought nothing of it. I answered the questions I was asked as honestly as I can and that was it.

The only people that take these surveys seriously are the people trying to use the result to promote their agenda. The problem is not with people taking the survey but with the manipulators. There are areas where the University system screws white people(mostly men) like with affirmative action and new era rape rules, but this is not one of them.

 

[UWDude]

The properties "strong, tall, smart, and poor" cannot be defined precisely in a non-arbitrary way because, just like race, they exist on a spectrum.

Oh boy, I'd love to see this spectrum. Perhaps some of the stormfronters here can post this spectrum for us. Where are albinos, blonde hair blue eyes, asians, east asians, south asians, caucasians, and semites? What about latinos?

The theory would, presumably, be that there is some (yet undiscovered) gene(s) which people with skin color X are more likely to have than people with skin color Y. It's not that there's any causal connection between skin color and behavior themselves.

People on planet A and B might, over the millennia, develop a variety of genetic differences due to different selection pressures in their respective habitats (both natural and social). Some of these might be visible - height, skin color, etc. Others might be invisible - resistance to some disease, intelligence, tendency for violence, etc

Oh, genes! Yeah! That makes it sound scientific!
Tendency for violence? Lets see, what "race" has killed more people in the world than any other "race"? On this spectrum, black people would be at the "non violent" end, and white people would take the cake for the most violent, with asians not far behind. Was that the spectrum you were thinking of?

Ohh, I get it, WORLD WARS and MASSIVE EUROPEAN WARS, as well as worldwide COLONIAL WARS, MASSACRES and SUBJUGATIONS don't count on this spectrum, right? This "spectrum" only applies to THUGS and LOOTERS!* Amirite or Amirite!?

Yes, the people of Haiti would have been better off under European colonial rule (as would virtually all of the peoples formerly ruled by the European colonial powers). This is not debatable.

Dumbass.

There are millions of Haitian slaves who did not die in the sugarcane fields by being worked to death after the successful slave revolt, who would be happy to debate your idiotic position.

See, your blind spot is, you don't consider Haitian slaves to be Haitians.

You're not worried about this professors blog, but you sure are worried about the posts in this thread.

My house, bitch. I didn't go looking for it, it came here.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

There are millions of Haitian slaves who did not die in the sugarcane fields by being worked to death after the successful slave revolt, who would be happy to debate your idiotic position.

You appear to think that there would still be slavery in Haiti if it weren't for independence.

The Haitians achieved independence in 1804.

France abolished slavery in the colonies in 1848.

So, the Haitians saved themselves 44 years of additional slavery. Yep, that's good. But, on the other hand, they cost themselves 211 years (and counting) of bad horrifyingly incompetent government. In my opinion, Haitians would be living much better lives today had they remained a French colony, the slaves been freed in 1848 rather than 1804, and they had been able to enjoy all the advantages of stable government for those 211 years. It's hardly conceivable that the Haitians could be worse off, considering that they're basically living at substance level (worse off = dead of malnutrition). Have the Haitians actually made any progress since 1804?

See, your blind spot is, you don't consider Haitian slaves to be Haitians.

What?

 

[UWDude]

You appear to think that there would still be slavery in Haiti if it weren't for independence.

The Haitians achieved independence in 1804.

France abolished slavery in the colonies in 1848.

So, the Haitians saved themselves 44 years of additional slavery. Yep, that's good. But, on the other hand, they cost themselves 211 years (and counting) of bad horrifyingly incompetent government. In my opinion, Haitians would be living much better lives today had they remained a French colony, the slaves been freed in 1848 rather than 1804, and they had been able to enjoy all the advantages of stable government for those 211 years. It's hardly conceivable that the Haitians could be worse off, considering that they're basically living at substance level (worse off = dead of malnutrition). Have the Haitians actually made any progress since 1804?

Well, Haiti was sanctioned, fully blockaded and forced to pay reparations for daring to free themselves.... ...that could not have impacted their history and stability any, do you think?

Oh, and 1915 - 1934. I don't see a whole lot of good happening then for the actual Haitian people then, either.

Oh, look, corvees forced upon the Haitians by the US. Look up "corvee", tell me what it means. LoL

And good one, just poo-pooing away 44 more years of THE MOST BRUTAL SLAVERY IN THE WORLD, then saying everything would be magical racial reconciliation with the french landowners after 1848. This must be this thing you claim to have knowledge of called "reality".

LoL!!