Chit-Chat: The Feels

[Lantern7]

16 minutes ago, Annber03 said:

My hope is that the BIden administration is quietly doing some heavy duty shit behind the scenes to try and make it a lot harder for Trump and the GOP to get a lot of what they want done, but that feels more like wishful thinking at this point than anything.

Biden had him over. The bastard tried to overthrow the government, and he had him over. I understand that Democrats want to feel like they have the moral high ground, but that is meaningless. I don't care that he won the Electoral and popular votes. My immediate urge? Burn down the White House and Capital. Republicans want to run the nation into the ground? Let 'em do it in a freezing parking lot. Or shit, let 'em move to Mar-a-Lago. I bet he'd love their company.

Apologies if I said too much. I've been cycling through unrealistic fantasies for over a week, up to and including having my conscience surgically removed. In the upcoming age, that's probably going to be a liability.

[Annber03]

No, yeah, I can sympathize compeltely with your sentiments. I told my mom last week that when Kamala gave her concession speech, if I were her and if I had the guts to do such a thing, I would've started it off with, "What the fuck is wrong with all of you?" :p .

[Lantern7]

4 minutes ago, Annber03 said:

No, yeah, I can sympathize compeltely with your sentiments. I told my mom last week that when Kamala gave her concession speech, if I were her and if I had the guts to do such a thing, I would've started it off with, "What the fuck is wrong with all of you?" :p .

She probably figures she could make like Nixon and win the White House eight years from now. Of course, who knows if there would be elections by then. Or if there would be a nation to run.

It's just galling that so many people said not to vote for the bastard, and the nation ignored them.

Oh, and the Republicans will have the House. I want to hope, but it feels unrealisitic to even attempt to do that.

[Soapy Goddess]

49 minutes ago, Annber03 said:

Well, we iddn't get any forgiveness for our loans, why should others?" Isn't the whole point to make things better for the next, so they DON'T have to deal with the struggles the generations before them dealt with? 

Yes, but not at one individual's expense. IMO, a loan is a personal and individual action. No everyone needs a loan. And those that do work to pay off said loan. IOW, if we start forgiving all student loans, how about those of us with mortgages demand that the government pay off our mortgages? 

[FilmTVGeek80]

16 minutes ago, Soapy Goddess said:

Yes, but not at one individual's expense. IMO, a loan is a personal and individual action. No everyone needs a loan. And those that do work to pay off said loan. IOW, if we start forgiving all student loans, how about those of us with mortgages demand that the government pay off our mortgages? 

What individual expense are you talking about? Who is being hurt by this? Sure you can demand they pay off your mortgage. Doesn’t mean it’s going to happen. 

[Soapy Goddess]

3 minutes ago, FilmTVGeek80 said:

What individual expense are you talking about? Who is being hurt by this? Sure you can demand they pay off your mortgage. Doesn’t mean it’s going to happen. 

Loans. No one is being hurt physically. It's a matter of how come I struggled to pay off my loans, but now others don't have to.

I'll remember to call my mortgage broker tomorrow and demand my mortgage loan is paid off. As you indicated, unlikely to happen.

[FilmTVGeek80]

22 minutes ago, Soapy Goddess said:

Loans. No one is being hurt physically. It's a matter of how come I struggled to pay off my loans, but now others don't have to.

I'll remember to call my mortgage broker tomorrow and demand my mortgage loan is paid off. As you indicated, unlikely to happen.

So, basically it’s exactly like I said people like you just have sour grapes that you didn’t benefit from something, so now no one should. Sorry, that’s not a valid reason why something shouldn’t happen. I guess women shouldn’t have the right to vote. Women didn’t get to before, why should that change.

By all means you do that. Who’s stopping you?

[Palimelon]

Quote

It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest to find out he's paid for more than one.

Reminds me of a joke someone told me, "Most male Republican politicians are against abortion...until their mistresses need to get one".

Quote

Agree, but unfortunately that is not what is being taught to our children. Instead even the 'losers' now get a trophy. Where's the fairness in that? Makes the 'winner' feel like they didn't accomplish anything.

One can argue that thinking - the "winner" feeling like they didn't accomplish anything - is probably what leads to attitudes like "that person is poor and/or homeless because they are lazy and didn't try hard enough" when the situation is more complex than that.

Quote

Yes, but not at one individual's expense. IMO, a loan is a personal and individual action. No everyone needs a loan. And those that do work to pay off said loan.

To people outside the US, it feels like the US is a society where much of the population is stuck with debts and loans because everything is so expensive. Buying a home, buying a car, going to college, medical bills if you don't have insurance (and the better policies aren't cheap either)...Americans just seem to spend a good chunk of their lives paying off their debts just so they can live.

Paying off mortgages and other debt would be much easier if people at least didn't have to worry about education and healthcare*. The fact that there are people in the their 50s and older working good jobs and are still paying off loans for their education is mind boggling.

*It's always funny seeing Instagram posts about over the top food products in the US, most of which tends to be super unhealthy, and people in the comments rightfully snarking how Americans eat like their healthcare is free...

Edited November 14 by Palimelon

[Soapy Goddess]

19 minutes ago, Palimelon said:

To people outside the US, it feels like the US is a society where much of the population is stuck with debts and loans because everything is so expensive. Buying a home, buying a car, going to college, medical bills if you don't have insurance (and the better policies aren't cheap either)...Americans just seem to spend a good chunk of their lives paying off their debts just so they can live.

Unfortunately, that's our economical system. And it's been that way for as long as I can remember. The only alternative is socialism.

[Palimelon]

No, you can do hybrid of capitalism and socialism. It doesn't just have to be one or the other.

[Soapy Goddess]

2 minutes ago, Palimelon said:

No, you can do hybrid of capitalism and socialism. It doesn't just have to be one or the other.

Totally agree. Hopefully it can be done without one or the other believing it doesn't represent their views. I hate the division we have now because one faction will always feel slighted and angry. Wish there was a satisfying middle ground acceptable to all.

[Soapy Goddess]

1 hour ago, FilmTVGeek80 said:

So, basically it’s exactly like I said people like you just have sour grapes that you didn’t benefit from something, so now no one should.

I believe this conversation started because someone said they were upset that their loan forgiveness is held up. So by your own post (bold is mine) this person  also has sour grapes? After all they are not benefitting from something that someone else received. It's human nature.

[ParadoxLost]

16 hours ago, FilmTVGeek80 said:

Like I said before, I also had to pay off my student loans. I would love to have had the opportunity to have them forgiven. It sucks that I didn’t, but I still don’t begrudge others the opportunity to have this good thing I didn’t. Should we not fix problems just because others who had to suffer don’t get to experience that better life? Should we have kept schools segregated just so the new and old generation could suffer the same way? I’m sure there are older gay people who never got the chance to marry their partners and that’s terrible. It doesn’t mean that gay marriage equality should have never happened. 
 

There are a lot of people out there trying to fight to make sure things like SS and Medicare don’t get gutted. They’re some of the same people who are fighting for student loan forgiveness. It’s not an either/or situation. 

The thing is that loan forgiveness doesn't fix the problem.  It perpetuates the problem.  Younger generations were screwed over by a series of legislation that made loans easier to get and not bankruptable.  The further from that legislation you were, the worse the deal you got because schools are basically corporations now.  They are going to suck every dollar they can manage out of a student and student loans became an infinite money supply.

And that's my issue with student loan forgiveness.  The government prints more money to do it.  Inflation goes up in general.  School cost goes up by even more by setting the precedent of a bail out.  Not to mention that student loans are a significant portion of the positive column on the government balance sheet.

There needs to be reform first for future students. And sucks that recent students are the ones left holding the bag on that.  But can't give a drunk a drink.  If they can figure out how to reform the system (without unintentionally making it worse) then I'm fine with some kind of means tested student loan forgiveness later on. 

I'm also all for testing whether there can be class action suits of some kind against schools with massive endowments that offered programs to kids that were never going to have any ROI.  The whole idea of not bankruptable student loans was that you could take back someone's house but not their education.  And there are some degrees that have no real market value and the schools knew it. And if they didn't make that abundantly clear to the student, that feels like fraud to me.

Same deal with Medicare and Social security. Social security is going to go bankrupt around the time I'm set to retire.  Frankly, I think they are going to need to do some kind of means testing on it.  Does it suck that this would mean that an earned benefit is not paid out, yes.  But frankly, I'd rather forgo getting it than have the younger, still working generations have to shoulder supporting it with a smaller base than I had to do.

Also, the money printing has led to essentially two economies. If you make enough save and invest, then things are all rosy for you because the money flowing to your investments is out pacing inflation and devaluation of your dollars. If you are just getting by, then the economy is a disaster. 

And generally speaking, I think Harris was courting the former, and Trump the latter. This is not the classical definition of who the parties are supporting.  It flipped to a degree.  And I'm not sure that the Democratic party saw it happening because they were focused on racial and gender groups as a proxy for class instead of class itself. 

They also had a no win as the incumbent.  They had to say the economy was good or bad.  Both were true depending on who you were.  Neither were good for Harris because they had to admit they did a bad job or abandon their base. They really should have just taken their medicine and admitted to mistakes, blamed unintended consequence of covid fiscal response, and that they understood what happened and wouldn't repeat. Then they could have pointed out that they weren't alone in the money printing.  But you can't call Trump out on that without admitting your own part.

Edited November 14 by ParadoxLost

[tearknee]

4 hours ago, Lantern7 said:

*sigh* So many fires, and I don't know where the hose should be aimed first. Also, I don't think there's any water.

I think Carrie White set off the hydrants....

[tearknee]

4 hours ago, Anela said:

trump called liberals "the enemy within". He said that the military should be turned on us. We are apparently worse than the dictators he loves - he said so.

Gay and trans people have been called pedophiles, as have liberals who support them. There was a whole conspiracy theory around liberals, that helped to get him elected before.

I can also tell you that the one aunt I have left, in England, used to hate trump, but she was a Brexiteer, and she is both transphobic, and wants immigrants out of the country. She voted Reform, and "liked" a post by someone else I know in the UK, who was happy that trump won. Because he stands for the same things. They have no problem hurting other people, insulting them, lying about them. 

My point was that making stupid mistakes helped "our" little green apples get worms in them. Realizing the bad optics of "deplorables" and "settlers" etc. was foreseeable and "we" should not have walked into that trap -- let alone multiple times!

[tearknee]

3 hours ago, Soapy Goddess said:

Agree, but unfortunately that is not what is being taught to our children. Instead, even the 'losers' now get a trophy. Where's the fairness in that? Makes the 'winner' feel like they didn't accomplish anything.

Yes. Acknowledging with a plaque or trophy that a person succeeded because of their personal skill and work is not bigotry.

[Anela]

21 minutes ago, tearknee said:

My point was that making stupid mistakes helped "our" little green apples get worms in them. Realizing the bad optics of "deplorables" and "settlers" etc. was foreseeable and "we" should not have walked into that trap -- let alone multiple times!

They have referred to people as vermin.  This was before “the enemy within”. 

[Palimelon]

Earlier someone was asking about the Trump/Musk relationship, and this showed up on my IG feed. I wonder which one of them will turn on the other first.

FYI, Trump posted that sometime in July 2022...

Edited November 14 by Palimelon

[Spartan Girl]

6 hours ago, Annber03 said:

No, yeah, I can sympathize compeltely with your sentiments. I told my mom last week that when Kamala gave her concession speech, if I were her and if I had the guts to do such a thing, I would've started it off with, "What the fuck is wrong with all of you?" :p .

I would have loved it if she and Biden did that. They’re better people than I am.

I understand why people are upset that Biden had Trump over and played nice with the photos etc but at this point, unless something is going on that we don’t know about, what the hell he supposed to do? Obama had to do the same thing even after all the disgusting things Trump said about him. And the people that claimed “both sides are equally bad” everything evidentially STILL haven’t learned their lesson, let alone owned up to the part they played in voter apathy, because now they’re shitposting about Biden somehow being a Trump supporter all along.

[Annber03]

There's also the whole thing of playing nice in public while taking the gloves off in private, and Biden's been in politics long enough to know how to play that game. I think people forget about that, too. I would not be surprised if Biden had a few choice words/warnings for Trump in private. 

[bluegirl147]

7 hours ago, Yeah No said:

How is it that Gen X gets to think it's cool because they don't GAF but the Baby Boom generation gets blamed for all the ills of society and not fixing everything?

The reason Gen X doesn't give a fuck is because people don't even know we exist.  We have all seen those memes of Boomers and Millennials fighting and Gen X sitting off to the side being ignored.  

In all seriousness Gen X does care.  We have always cared. We always do what needs to be done.  We just do it quietly with no fanfare.  

6 hours ago, Annber03 said:

(Frankly Ithink she was being far too kind even then, but again, that's a prime example of how she had to tiptoe around and be careful with everything she said lest she upset someone, but Trump can say utterly vile things about women and minorities and, well, that's just Trump for ya.)

Yep.  Different standards for Trump and everyone else.  Trump can call people who disagree with him politically the enemy from within and his base just shrugs their shoulder and say he is just speaking his mind.  Any sane person asks that Trump tone down the dangerous rhetoric and Trump's base screams free speech.  

 

[Ohiopirate02]

31 minutes ago, Palimelon said:

Earlier someone was asking about the Trump/Musk relationship, and this showed up on my IG feed. I wonder which one of them will turn on the other first.

FYI, Trump posted that sometime in July 2022...

Two stable geniuses I mean narcissists. It's only a matter of time before one of them turns on the other.

[tearknee]

3 minutes ago, bluegirl147 said:

The reason Gen X doesn't give a fuck is because people don't even know we exist.  We have all seen those memes of Boomers and Millennials fighting and Gen X sitting off to the side being ignored.  

In all seriousness Gen X does care.  We have always cared. We always do what needs to be done.  We just do it quietly with no fanfare.  

Yep.  Different standards for Trump and everyone else.  Trump can call people who disagree with him politically the enemy from within and his base just shrugs their shoulder and say he is just speaking his mind.  Any sane person asks that Trump tone down the dangerous rhetoric and Trump's base screams free speech.  

 

As an Xennial, I half-don't care and am half pissed off at Boomers!

What? ^_^

[bluegirl147]

6 hours ago, Annber03 said:

No, yeah, I can sympathize compeltely with your sentiments. I told my mom last week that when Kamala gave her concession speech, if I were her and if I had the guts to do such a thing, I would've started it off with, "What the fuck is wrong with all of you?" :p .

I know some people think it's wrong to blame voters but for the life of me I will never understand how people continue to vote for that man.  And I do realize if the numbers are to believed he won because less people voted overall but still more people voted for him.

3 hours ago, ParadoxLost said:

Frankly, I think they are going to need to do some kind of means testing on it. 

I have said this for years.  There is no reason millionaires need monthly SS payments. And yes I understand they pay into it but there are plenty of people who pay property taxes that go towards funding for schools and they have no children.

2 hours ago, Anela said:

They have referred to people as vermin.  This was before “the enemy within”. 

He also called immigrants animals.

23 minutes ago, Spartan Girl said:

I understand why people are upset that Biden had Trump over and played nice with the photos etc but at this point, unless something is going on that we don’t know about, what the hell he supposed to do?

Yes but having to do what Trump refused to do four years ago is just so hard to watch.  I do hope Biden said even if just under his breath, you motherfucker.

 

 

[tearknee]

Of course, "undocumented immigrant" is not a neutral term (it implies a POV that unauthorized immigrants are on the same level as authorized ones). The legal and thus neutral term is "unauthorized immigration".

This kind of duplicitous wordplay by the far-left is irritating to me. See it also used on TV Tropes at the below where "technically not a war crime" is used by the same partisans to imply that it should be. The reason it is not (and the same goes for things like the direction the "Belgrano" was going) is to discourage a "Trojan Horse" style scenario.

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/UsefulNotes/TheGulfWar

Edited November 14 by tearknee

[Yeah No]

7 hours ago, Annber03 said:

And I just don't see that being enough of a problem to where people need to worry about it. That fear seems to be borne out of a scenario where someone might take one or two instances in which htey heard about someone who has specific pronouns they go by throwing a fit online at some person who meant well but might've slipped up, and somehow extrapolated that to assume that EVERYONE who goes by certain pronouns will act that way towards anyone who might occasionally slip up in how they address them.

The fact is that most of them won't. Most people won't "cancel" anyone who makes an honest slip up but clearly still means well when trying to address someone by their preferred pronouns. Usually if someone is raked over the coals for messing up, it's because said person messed up on purpose, because they genuinely didn't respect and hat no interest in respecting the wishes of someone who wanted to go by a specific pronoun/pronouns. 

Maybe, and maybe not, but people really, really don't like to be told they're wrong when they're trying their best not to offend anyone. I've seen it get really mean spirited and picayune. I have seen this kind of behavior several times online alone so I don't think it's that insignificant. And it's usually used in such a way to make older people feel dismissed, canceled and invalidated. Maybe too much is being made out of it, but when something pisses people off that much they can get really upset about of something that seems insignificant to some others and blow it up in their minds.

It seems to a lot of people that the Democratic party is too PC for them. They want to be accepted warts and all, even if they use outdated words and concepts that may still be very relevant and OK with them. And they don't feel like they are intending to offend anyone with them. Being told not to use them feels to them like a pickiness that isn't the main point of the message of the party, and when stuff like that gets used against them, they will react negatively to it. And when you add up all these little events where they just can't seem to be PC enough for the party they end up not feeling included or welcome in it anymore. And in the process the general message of the party is not only drowned out by this experience but it is actually counter to it. Meanwhile the party of Trump will accept anyone no matter what words they use. They don't have to worry about being PC.

I find it very ironic and sad that MAGA looks more inclusive and forgiving to a lot of people than the Democratic Party, but I see how and why it's happening. Trump is the very symbol for a lot of people of the ultimate badass that can get away with anything and still win against what they see as "the establishment". My husband was telling me about a theory he read about why so many men, including minority men voted for him this time. Remember how many people said Martha Stewart got "street cred" when she was sent to jail? Well, Trump now has that as a result of all his felony convictions and now his assassination survival, where the primary symbol of him is throwing his fist up and continuing to "fight". That appeals to some people who feel oppressed by the "establishment", which they have identified with Trump's political opposition (i.e. the Democrats) ironically! I know it's hard to wrap your head around this but I can see how this theory might actually have some validity!

[Dimity]

6 hours ago, FilmTVGeek80 said:

So, basically it’s exactly like I said people like you just have sour grapes that you didn’t benefit from something, so now no one should.

People voted in a man who tried to overturn an election, a man who uses language straight out of the Nazi playbook, a man who cozies up to dictators,  a man who has blood on his hands.  These people have clearly demonstrated that entitled, selfish and self-centred are the buzz words for the next four years 😔.

Edited November 14 by Dimity

[Yeah No]

15 hours ago, Avaleigh said:

I agree with both of these points. In a perfect world, working class people would all be on the same side, but unfortunately  we're divided. We're getting sidetracked by identity politics and other, ultimately, minor issues, and it's causing us to lose track of the bigger picture. It's also part of the cause for why we're losing important elections.

We should be focused on the areas where we do have common ground and be less concerned with something like whether or not a politician looks like us because at the end of the day a person might not have a politician who looks like them, but they should always have the option of a politician who thinks like them and supports the issues they care about. 

Exactly, see my post above as to some of the "picky" differences that are sending people away from voting Democratic. And I have been posting the same thing about focusing on our common ground and not our differences. The problem is getting the message delivered to the right people in a way that will convince them.

[tearknee]

Again, most people think by emotion. Policy and statements almost never drives votes.

[bluegirl147]

2 minutes ago, Yeah No said:

 My husband was telling me about a theory he read about why so many men, including minority men voted for him this time. Remember how many people said Martha Stewart got "street cred" when she was sent to jail? Well, Trump now has that as a result of all his felony convictions and now his assassination survival, where the primary symbol of him is throwing his fist up and continuing to "fight". That appeals to some people who feel oppressed by the "establishment", which they have identified with Trump's political opposition (i.e. the Democrats) ironically! I know it's hard to wrap your head around this but I can see how this theory might actually have some validity!

I can see that but that is putting style over substance and in the end we all will pay. 

You use the word perception a lot and you are correct.  With social media becoming an even bigger part of people's lives what people see even if it isn't true becomes real to them.  You can't unring a bell as they say during trial when a jury hears something that isn't actual evidence.   Millions of people vote for the man they Trump is not the man he actually is.  

[Dimity]

2 minutes ago, bluegirl147 said:

 Millions of people vote for the man they Trump is not the man he actually is.

And the fault for this lays squarely at the feet of the mainstream media.  I will never understand why they sanewashed him - oh sure for the most part they did endorse Kamala and Biden and Hilary Clinton but they did this while at the same time never covering adequately all the truly awful things Trump was saying and all the many ways his minions were doing his bidding.

[Makai]

4 hours ago, ParadoxLost said:

Same deal with Medicare and Social security. Social security is going to go bankrupt around the time I'm set to retire.

Probably sooner if mass deportation actually happens. Undocumented workers pay billions into social security every year and they can’t receive any benefits from it. 

[bluegirl147]

3 minutes ago, Dimity said:

And the fault for this lays squarely at the feet of the mainstream media. 

I remember in 2016 Les Moonves who was running CBS at the time said Trump might not be good for the country but he was good for CBS bottom line or something to that effect.   And now we have media companies afraid of Trump.  You can't tell me Bezos prevented the Washington Post from issuing an endorsement of Harris for any reason other than he didn't want to make an enemy of Trump.

6 minutes ago, Makai said:

Probably sooner if mass deportation actually happens.

Don't forget the tariffs.  If they raise prices on consumer goods people will start spending less. And when people cut down on their spending some businesses lay people off resulting less money being paid into SS and Medicare.

Trump and his cronies either don't realize or don't care their policies are going to hurt pretty much everyone except the top 1%. And for the voters who think all of this is going to work out and it will be sunshine and roses go ahead and take another swig of that Kool Aid.  

[Makai]

21 minutes ago, bluegirl147 said:

Don't forget the tariffs.  If they raise prices on consumer goods people will start spending less. And when people cut down on their spending some businesses lay people off resulting less money being paid into SS and Medicare.

Trump and his cronies either don't realize or don't care their policies are going to hurt pretty much everyone except the top 1%. And for the voters who think all of this is going to work out and it will be sunshine and roses go ahead and take another swig of that Kool Aid.  

Yep. Through all the conversations this feels like rubbing salt in the wound. Trump’s policies will never match up with his promises but too many just blindly believed and now we all have to suffer the consequences. Trump’s plan is an economic nightmare. 

Edited November 14 by Makai

[tearknee]

Already 78, Trump is likely to die within the next ten years, but i doubt that MAGA will - the centrifugal forces are too great.

The MAGA movement taken on a life beyond Trump himself, and structural forces suggest MAGA's staying power:

Certain media networks and personalities

Social media influencers

Local and state political organizations

Rising political figures who've adopted the ideology

Also, the underlying grievances and cultural divisions that fueled MAGA's rise remain unresolved:

Urban/rural divide

Cultural changes

Economic inequalities

Demographic shifts

Next-generation leaders have already emerged in the form of figures like Gaetz, Stefanik, and others who represent a younger generation of MAGA leadership and they've learned to harness these structural forces effectively

My use of "centrifugal forces" I feel is apt as it suggests how the movement's energy continues to pull away from traditional center-right politics, regardless of Trump's personal future.

Even if Trump exits the scene, the political realignment he catalyzed appears likely to continue influencing American politics well beyond his lifetime.

[Palimelon]

Quote

It seems to a lot of people that the Democratic party is too PC for them. They want to be accepted warts and all, even if they use outdated words and concepts that may still be very relevant and OK with them. And they don't feel like they are intending to offend anyone with them. Being told not to use them feels to them like a pickiness that isn't the main point of the message of the party, and when stuff like that gets used against them, they will react negatively to it. And when you add up all these little events where they just can't seem to be PC enough for the party they end up not feeling included or welcome in it anymore. And in the process the general message of the party is not only drowned out by this experience but it is actually counter to it.

That sounds like a way for people to keep saying offensive things because f*ck people's feelings if they are offended by it. Saying offensive things isn't inclusive, even if you feel what is being said isn't offensive and/or it's only being said about the tiniest minorities.

Quote

Meanwhile the party of Trump will accept anyone no matter what words they use. They don't have to worry about being PC.

They also don't give a sh*t if they offend someone with what they say, So of course they will accept anyone no matter what words they use. Well, as long as you aren't saying anything critical about heterosexual White christians (especially men). Then it's ok to offended.

[Yeah No]

8 hours ago, Bastet said:

White privilege is equally distributed among that group (just like male privilege or any other privilege among their own dominant group), it's just their overall power gets diluted when a white person is simultaneously disadvantaged by their membership in a marginalized group or groups.

The reality of white privilege means that a white person who is also part of X number (be that 1 to umpteen) of marginalized groups - gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, economic status, etc. - is affected by institutional problems because of those other identities, but still has the racial privilege that gives them a leg up over those who share all their disadvantage(s) but don't benefit from being white, because they don't also have racism to contend with on top of everything else. 

That's it, a simple truth.  Privileges exist on their own and across a variety of combinations, creating a baseline existence people may or may not overcome based on individual circumstances. 

(Again - because for some reason this other simple truth needs by some to be explicitly acknowledged - someone with every advantage still has problems, being human and all, but those problems are individual, not institutional.)

OK, but after the umpteenth disadvantage that dilutes a white man's actual real world experience of privilege it loses a lot of its meaning and effect for a lot of them. Definitions like that really get diluted by real-world circumstances. I know white men that feel that they very rarely if ever reaped any benefits of their white male privilege and knowing their particular issues, background and circumstances I can see how they would feel that way. And even if they did experience some privilege it wasn't enough to make much of a real difference to them in the big picture. It wasn't enough to make them well off. This is especially the experience of lower class white men, so that for me explains why so many of them are upset at being told they have such privilege and have run right into Trump's arms.

I do feel, though, that upper middle and upper class white men do actually experience more of this privilege and it makes more of a real difference in their lives. I think some of what is being identified as white privilege is also a factor of class privilege. That's not to say that successful black people have no disadvantage purely from being black, they do, but they may actually experience less of it because their positional and financial power might help insulate them from some of it. Of course that doesn't invalidate the concept in general but I do think real world circumstances play a part in the extent to which it is experienced.

Edited November 14 by Yeah No
Had to clarify something.

[bluegirl147]

3 minutes ago, tearknee said:

Economic inequalities

One of if not the biggest problem in this country.  And yet people keep voting for the people who are exasperating this.

4 minutes ago, tearknee said:

Next-generation leaders have already emerged in the form of figures like Gaetz, Stefanik,

A man who has been credibly accused of sexual inappropriateness with minors and sex trafficking and woman who changed her political beliefs to save her own political life.  

[Ohiopirate02]

6 minutes ago, Palimelon said:

They also don't give a sh*t if they offend someone with what they say, So of course they will accept anyone no matter what words they use. Well, as long as you aren't saying anything critical about heterosexual White christians (especially men). Then it's ok to offended.

It's actually heterosexual, cisgender, white Christians. I've heard "cis is a slur" more than once from this crowd. Though transphobia is also found in leftist circles.

[Yeah No]

3 minutes ago, Palimelon said:

That sounds like a way for people to keep saying offensive things because f*ck people's feelings if they are offended by it. Saying offensive things isn't inclusive, even if you feel what is being said isn't offensive and/or it's only being said about the tiniest minorities.

They also don't give a sh*t if they offend someone with what they say, So of course they will accept anyone no matter what words they use. Well, as long as you aren't saying anything critical about heterosexual White christians (especially men). Then it's ok to offended.

But for a lot of these people, it's not because they want to keep saying offensive things at all. It's that they don't see what is offensive about what they're saying in the first place. For a lot of older people there were never negative connotations associated with some of these words so they see being told not to use them as just more stuff designed to make them feel outdated, invalidated and wrong about everything. And they recoil at the idea that some young upstarts are now dictating to them what is right and wrong to say based on what they see as erroneous connotations placed on innocent words. I'm just telling you how they feel about it, I'm not justifying it.

They also make the case that if they're not intending to offend anyone people should just get off their high horses and realize that, and stop associating negative connotations with otherwise non-offensive words. It's not that they don't give a crap about offending anyone - they would give a crap if they thought it was a valid complaint. And they feel like the ones that are being offended. Again, just telling you, not condoning it. I only feel that way about certain words but I fully get why most of them are a problem.

[bluegirl147]

5 minutes ago, Yeah No said:

I think some of what is being identified as white privilege is also a factor of class privilege. That's not to say that successful black people have no disadvantage purely from being black, they do, but they may actually experience less of it because their positional and financial power might help insulate them from some of it.

In a lot of places a black man driving a Mercedes will get pulled over. So yes there is definitely class privilege but people of color no matter how much money they have  still face discrimination.  

[Absolom]

9 hours ago, Yeah No said:

Speaking of Medicare, now that I am on it, I can attest to the fact that it is NOT cheap and they keep raising the premiums and whittling away at what it covers too. I am not on a low or no premium Advantage plan because everyone in my area complains about them not being so good (and I've done my research on this both alone and with my Medicare counselor) so I'm on a regular supplemental plan with part D. My part D premiums have doubled in the past year and this was my first year on Medicare. So it's not just about things not being gutted - we need much more than THAT to bring us where we should be. So yeah, it is more of an either/or situation than it looks like it is, at least from my point of view. I had cheaper premiums and better coverage when I was working! I personally like the idea of Medicaid for all. When I was on Medicaid it paid for EVERYTHING. Of course the way things are going I am sure that all of that will come to pass after I'm long gone...sigh. 

This is why I laugh when people demand Medicare for all as the big fix. Medicare for all would leave me owing around $6000 a month. Learn the system before callling for it.  What Medicaid deems to cover, it does cover well. 

[bluegirl147]

Just now, Yeah No said:

But for a lot of these people, it's not because they want to keep saying offensive things at all. It's that they don't see what is offensive about what they're saying in the first place.

I don't understand if you are saying they genuinely don't know it's offensive or are you saying even after being told it's offensive they keep saying it because they think they know best?

[Yeah No]

Just now, bluegirl147 said:

In a lot of places a black man driving a Mercedes will get pulled over. So yes there is definitely class privilege but people of color no matter how much money they have  still face discrimination.  

My husband is white but he is routinely pulled over driving a Mercedes limousine purely for driving at night, which is seen as suspect behavior in a lot of rich communities where they "pull in the sidewalks" after midnight. This is my husband, the dyslexic that drives a limousine for a living. But even he is aware of the "driving while black" phenomenon and agrees that it's a real thing. He has seen it a lot in his experiences on the road. So he acknowledges his experience of white privilege when applicable, but for him it is diluted by his real world experience to some degree.

[Palimelon]

Quote

But for a lot of these people, it's not because they want to keep saying offensive things at all. It's that they don't see what is offensive about what they're saying in the first place. For a lot of older people there were never negative connotations associated with some of these words so they see being told not to use them as just more stuff designed to make them feel outdated, invalidated and wrong about everything. And they recoil at the idea that some young upstarts are now dictating to them what is right and wrong to say based on what they see as erroneous connotations placed on innocent words. I'm just telling you how they feel about it, I'm not justifying it.

By that logic then, it should be ok for people of a certain age to keep using the n-word or the f-word.

Society is not stagnant and keeps changing. Words that used to be innocent to some might not be that way to others anymore.

Quote

They also make the case that if they're not intending to offend anyone people should just get off their high horses and realize that, and stop associating negative connotations with otherwise non-offensive words. It's not that they don't give a crap about offending anyone - they would give a crap if they thought it was a valid complaint. And they feel like the ones that are being offended. Again, just telling you, not condoning it. I only feel that way about certain words but I fully get why most of them are a problem.

It's kind of hard to ignore the connotation of that word if you are a part of that group being denigrated by that word, regardless of the intent.

And I'm not sure why the feelings of the person using that word should take precedence or priority of the person being offended by that word.

Quote

My husband is white but he is routinely pulled over driving a Mercedes limousine purely for driving at night, which is seen as suspect behavior in a lot of rich communities where they "pull in the sidewalks" after midnight.

But your husband isn't being pulled over for being white. Your husband is being pulled over for driving at night. It's not the same thing as being pulled over at any time of the day in any part of the country just because he is driving a car and not having the right skin color.

Edited November 14 by Palimelon

[bluegirl147]

2 minutes ago, Palimelon said:

And I'm not sure why the feelings of the person using that word should take precedence or priority of the person being offended by that word.

As I have said before they think their intolerance should be tolerated.

[tearknee]

17 minutes ago, bluegirl147 said:

A man who has been credibly accused of sexual inappropriateness with minors and sex trafficking and woman who changed her political beliefs to save her own political life.  

90+% are voting by emotion not intellect.

Just like Thatcher with Galtieri, Scargill et al, MAGA is lucky in its enemies.

Voters may have been in a trance, but "we" were in a daydream.

"We" certainly made Trump (just as her enemies made Thatcher) seem better than the alternative.

 

[PRgal]

24 minutes ago, bluegirl147 said:

In a lot of places a black man driving a Mercedes will get pulled over. So yes there is definitely class privilege but people of color no matter how much money they have  still face discrimination.  

But often it's only when you compare apples to apples. And by apples, I mean class, not ethnic origin.  The poor White guy will see the upper middle class Black guy as being more privileged because, well, he owns a home, has a degree (or more), an office job (unless he's a 20 year old who just happens to be driving a parent's car), etc.....

 

Re Trump's win and the economy:  My husband (and to a certain extent, me) has been joking that he is beginning to "like" Trump because the markets are up.  Yeah, but what goes up must come down - especially when it goes up this quickly.  Remember how Bitcoin basically soared during the beginning of the pandemic?  Well, it's not like that now...this whole thing could also be a meme market...

[bluegirl147]

7 minutes ago, PRgal said:

Re Trump's win and the economy:  My husband (and to a certain extent, me) has been joking that he is beginning to "like" Trump because the markets are up.

I'm not saying this is how you feel but during his first term I saw a lot of people say yeah he is a racist/Hitler wannabe/asshole but my 401K is doing great.  I could never be that person. I'm not saying I won't enjoy any benefits that come with a second Trump term (although I am at a loss to think of what benefit they could be) but I will never not think he is the worst thing to happen to our country.

[Dimity]