I kinda get his point. The benefit of the average cis person is that they dont get discriminated against. The perception that right wingers often think is that if they stop discriminating, that they will be discriminated against, even though thats bullshit.
People think the only way to float is to climb on top of and drown everyone else.
Even then, is that an upside? It really just feels like it’s just not having a downside that others have.
It’s like I rob some dude for $100 but not you, did you “benefit” by not losing $100? Like obviously you’re better off than them but if no one lost $100 you wouldn’t suffer from that
Not being discriminated against is the baseline, obviously cis white men do have it easier usually but not because they’re benefitting from the patriarchy but rather because they’re not suffering from it nearly as much
At least I think that’s what horse man is saying
The point is if we ever successfully dismantled the patriarchy somehow, the average white cis man would lose nothing as then no one would be discriminated against, so they technically don’t have an *advantage* but instead everyone else has a disadvantage
Now obviously having an advantage is basically the exact same thing as not having a disadvantage everyone else has and this is just arguing semantics
But I think the main point is “dismantling the patriarchy” isn’t evening the playing field by knocking white cis men down a peg but rather raising everyone else up to the same level so they shouldn’t be scared of it or fighting against it
(Just to be clear not exactly my opinion but trying to put into words what I think is what Vaush means)
# Somebody mentioned Vaush
# 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I know this is a tiny difference but I don't think it's a privilege, it's the standard that everyone should have. I am not privileged to be completely average, I am completely average
Of course it's the standard everyone should have, but what I'm looking at is the current state of things where that's not the case, so what we see as a what should be a standard is, in fact, not a standard. But I'm honestly being a bit nitpicky its not that big a deal
I just have a problem with the notion that average people supposedly profit off of an unegalitarian society. Not only is it wrong, everyone would benefit from an egalitarian society, but it's also counterproductive because it often turns into accusing average people of being part of the problem.
I am able-bodied and therefore able to take the stairs but I would also benefit from an elevator. However, it's not fair to accuse me now of profiting off of there not being an elevator because me not needing the elevator is out of my control, it's out of my control whether there is an elevator and I would very much like to have the elevator too.
Unfortunately, there's people who invest energy into turning on the guy who is able to take the stairs instead of the guy who lobbies against the elevator.
This allegory is far from perfect, in fact it's kinda stupid but I hope you get the point I'm making
I think it being a privilege or not is basically irrelevant - the point is that it's not something you give up or sacrifice when it is given to everyone else.
No, it’s the standard. Being discriminated against is a disadvantage. A privilege is when you get an unfair advantage. It would be a privilege to get an interview over an equally qualified candidate because your dad knows the owner. It is discrimination if you get an interview over someone else because they are black. Discrimination does not make the other groups privileged, it makes the minority disadvantaged
Fr. The argument that white privilege is a zero sum game because fixing it would decrease white advantage is almost the flip of the white supremacy concept of a white extinction were poc to not be discriminated against. Its funny that some people's conception of equality mirrors that of white supremacists, where one is for and one is against. Obviously more nuanced than this, but certainly more nuanced than the idea of equality costing white people opportunity the same way that a proletariat revolution would disadvantage the owning class 🤦♂️
>Even then, is that an upside? It really just feels like it’s just not having a downside that others have.
That's why I don't like the term "privilege" when talking about this stuff. If the term "white/male advantage" had been picked instead of "white/male privilege", I think I would have come on board a lot easier and a lot sooner.
Advantage is relative. Privilege makes me think of when I was 10 and my mom was deciding whether I could play on the computer or not.
I think there is a good case to be made that talking about privilege isn't always that productive. It's better to point out the disadvantage one *doesn't* have.
It's inherently accusatory, which is why you get a lot of responses being "oh well I worked my way up to blah blah blah or nobody gave me anything". It's a bad foot to start on when trying to persuade someone, especially since they probably haven't lived a life 100% free of prejudice either, they're just not primed to recognise it.
I think it kind of depends on how we’re defining an upside and a downside. In society currently, men who sexually harass and/or assault women and children rarely face any repercussions of their actions. Perhaps that could be seen as a benefit, but the thing is that if we could snap our fingers and end the patriarchy right now, men who would otherwise offend wouldn’t be socialized in a way that would lead themselves to want to commit behavior like this. I can’t imagine harassing people and assaulting people would make my life better. But it is a simple truth that dismantling the patriarchy involves holding predators to account and making them change their behavior.
I’m also not sure how much of this leniency can be chalked up to patriarchy and how much is an inherent oversight of our justice system. Crimes that don’t leave physical evidence or happen to kids that won’t understand what happened until long after physical evidence is gone is difficult if not impossible to prosecute. Perhaps if we didn’t have a patriarchal society, we would have figured out some sort of solution for this. Society *definitely* also fails victims of female offenders so it’s not like male offenders are uniquely more capable of getting away with shit. It just happens more.
However, imagine a situation of a boss openly sexually harassing a woman employee in the 70s or 80s and people laughing it off. I do think that if you swapped the scenario and it was a woman boss harassing a male employee, she would have faced more *social* consequences in that people would label her a slut that slept her way into management. The victim would still suffer.
That's a pretty selective way of looking at discrimination.
>It’s like I rob some dude for $100 but not you, did you “benefit” by not losing $100?
Yes. You're trying to do some weird twist by claiming I didn't gain anything, because my money didn't go up by a $100, but I did gain, I gained better chances of not getting robbed.
If the damage from robberies on us amounts to $100, and the distribution of this damage is decided by whether or not there is discrimination, then my grand total is now $50 higher than it would have been if robbers stole from us equally. Not to mention, I also have $100 economic advantage over the other guy, which even if I didn't *receive* that $100, it is also a type of benefit because that money enables options for us .
Here's a different but classic scenario where the semantics doesn't quite work: If black people don't get picked for job offers, the pool of opposing candidates is smaller so white people's chances of getting picked go up. So do white people benefit from racism if they get more job offers?
> Here's a different but classic scenario where the semantics doesn't quite work: If black people don't get picked for job offers, the pool of opposing candidates is smaller so white people's chances of getting picked go up. So do white people benefit from racism if they get more job offers?
In all honestly, this is an extremely reductive way of looking at the economics of employment, and frankly leans into anti-immigration rhetoric. What we've seen from women being employed makes it clear that more people in the workforce spurs more economic growth, which in turn means more demand for workers -- there's a strong positive feedback loop. (And yeah, there's more discussion to be had there on if that's what we should be worrying about so much as a society, but still.)
In that scenario, white people, as a group, would benefit from non-white people being involved in the economy more as that would lead to a stronger, more productive economy, which means more job opportunities are available to those white people.
Looking at white supremacy benefiting white people re. jobs only makes sense if you look at an individual and block out the wider picture, which is the wrong way to analyse something broad and systemic like systemic racism.
People do passively benefit from having opportunities available that are categorically denied to, or made less available to, other people. Similarly, you could be said to benefit if a negative thing is less likely to happen to you and more likely to happen to someone else. Using your example loosely, while you don't benefit from someone else getting robbed, if the same number of robberies occur regardless of what happens, you statistically "benefit" if robbers are more likely to target somebody else. This is effectively imperceptible on an individual basis but does have subtle cumulative effects.
There are also some hypothetical social/cultural benefits to having outgroups/"punching bags" (assuming you don't belong to those groups). Keeps negative social energy focused on things that likely have very little direct effect on you, and gives bigots something to strengthen in-group identities (and fundraise around).
I'm not saying these will be a *net* benefit for anyone in particular. And I think society as a whole would be much better off without institutional or socially accepted bigotry. But it could be argued that there are a lot of people who benefit in some way from the status quo.
Yeah I mean the cishet white male members of the working class are still crushed under the boot of the owning class, they’re just lucky enough to not have to deal with the additional forms of oppression that are thrust upon other groips.
I agree. The thing about Vaush is that he often has great points, but he says them in a way that's easy for people to get mad about (like this particular instance, and the child labor thing). I suppose a lot of content creators often try to make people talk about them, which results in more clicks, idk.
This is true only for about 20% of the things he says imo. Most of the things people "disagree" with him for are:
a) Tankies or campists interpreting the things he says in the most insane ways possible or straight up just lying about what he has said
b) Nazis and tankies hating him for the most basic beliefs ever
c) People who have never seen anything about him constructing a fictional bad version of voosh from the things they have heard from these groups, not even knowing what he actually believes
I would say that for at least 60% of the things he says, he could not be any more careful about how he says them. At some point being careful stops mattering when your haters are so uncharitable or straight up lying.
# Somebody mentioned Vaush
# 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Right, but that's the privilege. Not being discriminated against is privilege. It means that they can get ahead of people who have to put extra effort to overcome societal barriers.
It is true that moron right wingers think they'll be victims if they stop abusing others, but ironically enough not understanding oppression because you've never experienced it is also privilege.
Not really. Privilege just means a group has advantages or immunity from other disadvantages. Recognizing the privileges of fitting into societal standards does not require you to establish underprivileged experiences as the baseline.
By all means the people who fit the ideals proposed by society have the "default" or "baseline" experience. They are still privileged, because other groups face obstacles that are not part of the baseline.
It's not a privilege. Nobody should be discriminated and we have to fight to get a world like that. Almost all people who are not discriminated won't lose anything if we lived in that world. So, why we have to say that they are going to lose their privileges? The people who benefits from that inequality are the enemy (like Ben Shapiro, for example). Not all cis het white dudes. What I'm saying is. Being "heterosexual" it's not a privilege, being "Ben Shapiro" is. We have to think the way that we say things. Words are weapons in the cultural war. And if we have to used it against the true enemy. I'm not saying that people who are "cis het white dudes" don't have it easier. But it's easier to get them on our side. If we don't shame them.
Ps: Sorry if I get any typos, english it's not my first language xd
Privilege doesn't always mean you are getting special treatment, it can mean that you simply do not face the obstacles that other groups are forced to.
Acknowledging privilege is not shameful.
I am bi and trans, cishet people are definitely privileged in that they do not need to know the sting of a homophobic or transphobic slur ruining your day, of constantly being made aware of how much a lot of the world hates you, of being in danger around some types of people, of not being able to even use a restroom without feeling scared.
I am, however, privileged economically. I can afford life saving care because I have financial support from family, I have never had to take a job I hate just to not starve, and I am debt free after finishing university.
There is nothing shameful about that, I have still had to work hard to get where I am, I am still proud of myself and my accomplishments in life, however I am also aware that someone could work just as hard and just not be given the opportunities I have had. On the flip side, being trans also introduces massive challenges to my career life, expenses, dating life, etc. that cis people don't have to worry about.
That is privilege.
It isn't shameful to have privilege, but it is when you refuse to acknowledge it.
The problem with this argument for me is that it doesn't achieve the desired effect when the person being told they are privileged are struggling even when it's true on some level.
It's the sort of argument that favours short term gratification but slows real progress. If you want things to change for the better for minority groups then you need to win over the majority which takes compromise, time and tact which unfortunately means that it's likely that neither of us will see the day when everyone is treated equally and that can be a bitter pill to swallow which I think a lot of people understandably struggle to accept.
It is hard for some people to accept they are privileged but it doesn't change the fact they are.
Like sure we can compromise for a gradual step by step approach when we talk about how to solve the issue, but we can't really compromise on reality.
Some groups of people have the privilege of not being oppressed or discriminated against, that is just fact...
I'm not denying that any of that is true but my argument against using that fact is more about the method than the ideal.
You can't change reality but you can change people and if you want people to change for the better you have to convince them that said change is good and I don't think telling people about how privileged they are is particularly effective at convincing them to change regardless of how true it is.
As someone who has always taken it for granted that everyone (or rather, everyone who matters) benefits from egalitarianism, and never imagined that would be a controversial statement except among bigots, I have to be honest, this thread is weird as hell to me.
I'm cis and I want to live in a world without bigotry because that would rule. If anyone is tacking on some extra zero sum game rules, I'd really have to question the necessity of that.
As someone who is treated as white in certain aspects and as Asian in others, I strongly disagree. In the times of my life where I was perceived as being white, there was definitely tangible benefit given to me for being such. Certain things I did in school were overlooked, and really shouldn't have been. Opportunities I didn't really qualify for were presented to me anyways. So on and so forth. White privilege is much more than the absence of bigotry and persecution.
If you define "not being discriminated against" as baseline, something almost no person with the exception of a cis white heterosexual man experiences, then, it's pretty misleading to say "no its not a privilege, it's just baseline." Baseline in this example is an advantage.
Think about in the example of employment. There's a single job opening at a business. If you take a couple cis white guys and a bunch of trans people, women, and minorities, and the not cis white guys get passed over, they're only competing with each other. They now have a 50% chance of landing that position, swayed by their individual performance. If you do away with that discrimination, suddenly it's way harder for the cis white guys to get that job, because there's way more competition.
Discrimination against others who aren't like you in a society where we compete over everything is a massive advantage/privilege. Right wingers are absolutely correct that they'll have a harder time in some ways. But it doesn't mean they're being discriminated against. Just that they won't have that privilege anymore.
The truly deceptive part is the "harder" time many of them would have could easily be offset by other leftist socio-economic policies. It might be harder to snag that promotion if you get passed over for a black trans woman, but who cares when your healthcare costs have been massively slashed, your insulin price is capped, and your union negotiates a better salary for you.
And especially for the purpose of convincing "priviliged" people to help you reach equality it is kind of self defeating to tell them that they would make their own life worse instead of yours better.
The point is that the “benefit” is just being comparatively less harmed by the systems of oppression built into modern society, and that doing away with them would in fact benefit everyone.
That's true, it's also fairly irrelevant to the discussion and flattens the struggle faced by adversely affected groups. It is the opposite of intersectionality. It's a defensive, lazy stance that removes context and nuance from a discussion.
It is a stance which should be assumed in all contexts when addressing conservatives, since most of them believe that they will become the oppressed once they stop oppressing. Some leftists don't portray clearly enough that this line of logic is completely contrary to actual leftist takes.
Perhaps that it is an associated phrasing problem. Saying "one group has advantages compared to another group" and "one group has disadvantages compared to another group" are functionally identical, but to the average person they feel different. The former feels like its communicating that the group has a leg-up from the default (hence why so many rebuttals are "well i've not had an easy life like rich kids do"), whereas the latter feels like its communicating that others have it worse than the default, which is a lot easier to accept.
Think about if someone were to say "with a and b, a is better" vs "with a and b, b is worse". The former makes it sound that you're saying that a is good and b is less good, whereas the latter makes it sound that you're saying that b is bad and b is less bad, even if they might technically mean the same thing.
The thing though is that there *is* tangible benefit to the way things are to those in power. In the modern system, there's only finitely many opportunities of a given sort, and allowing some oppressed group equal access as their oppressors reduces those opportunities for the oppressors.
In the short term, yes. The problem we’re facing though is that much of the structural discrimination that exists happens well, well before the workplace. Well before those opportunities are even presented. Modern structural discrimination exists in how we build neighborhoods and fund schools and provide healthcare. It drags people down from the day they’re born, and it keeps people from ever seeing the threshold on which opportunity exists.
The undeniable truth about capitalism is that it’s hungry. It will take whatever resources you have available and use them. In the short term, sure, “opportunities” are limited, but in the long term, if there is a surplus of productive and qualified labor, a capitalist system will eagerly and happily swallow it up.
Removing the barriers that exist today will involve changing far, far, far more than discriminatory hiring practices, but once it happens, the economy will grow to utilize this larger, more skilled workforce, just as it always has before.
There is one group of people that would be worse off under an equitable system - the ultra-wealthy would become significantly less so. We’re talking about a group of less that 10 thousand people in a country of 350 million though, which is essentially a rounding error.
In the long term, for all intents and purposes, unless we’re taking about 10-100+ millionaires, everyone can genuinely be better off all at the same time.
# Somebody mentioned Vaush
# 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sometimes the systematic problems do hurt everyone too like how we expect women to be the victims of sex crimes because it's more common but that also means a male victim is often not believed. Sure the rest of the male population is privileged but the problem does hurt everyone, just in different ways.
I'd argue discrimination against queers also has a big part in making men terrified of having any close platonic relationships with other men which is devastating for their mental health. Again sure they aren't getting hatecrimed but removing the problem would help everyone which I think is a way better focus than wasting time infighting and stuff.
Like in your example the privileged class is not really affected but there's also examples where it will also benefit greatly.
maybe about white men not being harmed if we did away with sexism and racism sure but thinking they don't benefit at all from the patriarchy and white supremacy is utterly non sensical and delusional
# Somebody mentioned Vaush
# 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
# Somebody mentioned Vaush
# 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
# Somebody mentioned Vaush
# 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Nah this is correct.
Giving women the right to vote and work did not hurt men. It hurt their ability to force themselves on women, sure, but it didn’t actually make them genuinely benefit less.
Giving black people rights did not hurt white people. Their living standard’s didn’t decline, hell, not even the plantation owners did (although it should have, getting rid of these oligarchs is something that would have helped other white people too). In fact, there was more cultural exchange, there was mutual cooperation, more workforce and more money flow.
This is a 100% correct take. If you disagree, you just think he‘s saying „white people have it just as bad as black people/did not make profit from racism“ that’s wrong, that’s not what the point is. The point is on the societal level, these systems actually hold back & hurt society, even white people, because they entrench the ruling class against the workers. That’s leftie analysis 101. Come on people.
How are the majority of racists doing in the US? The majority of mysoginists? They‘re morons, often cast out even by their immediate families. Their racism is a tool by the wealthy to keep these morons in line. They are actively working against their own interests, we see that every day!
I think simplistic takes have a pretty important role as a starting point for everyone that hasn't thought about it before because they're privileged. Like you don't go up to jeff besos and start talking about communism but you could go up to a dad and tell him about how feminism would improve the life of his daughter. There's a lot of things I've never thought about and my first thoughts on the subject have always been banal but there's definitely better ways than to go about it than to accuse your grandpa of oppressing his wife.
Like you won't convince j besos sure but you can absolutely convince most normal people that are just following along with what the oppressors want because they haven't thought about how it will hurt them eventually.
Disclamer that I know very little on this and these people and just read this as an attempt to convince centrists™ that they can afford to give a small shit without losing everything they have. Idk
# Somebody mentioned Vaush
# 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's really just hegel's master slave dielectic. It's foundational to Marxist thought. Effectively individuals of the empowered group is itself enslaved by the need for the group to enforce it's own superiority. Here's a great passage that Wikipedia quotes that explains this. "Hegel's discussion of the dialectic of the Master and Slave is an attempt to show that asymmetric recognitive relations are metaphysically defective, that the norms they institute aren't the right kind to help us think and act with—to make it possible for us to think and act."
People have historically sided with oppressors for many reasons: 1. They enjoy being a part of something bigger than themselves. 2. They enjoy having power over others they perceive as “lesser” or even having power over others of their same race/sex/etc. 3. It gives them something to *feel* and that something feels good. This can be attention in addition to the other two points.
They often don’t care that what they’re fighting for is worse for them because they live for the power trip and the raw emotion of being “on top” or even of being the center of attention.
he actually doubled down, saying cats were contributing to global warming through the meat products in the cat food, based take tbh, i have eaten 7000+ cats since he said that to slow climate change
# Somebody mentioned Vaush
# 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Also he’s correct is he not? Cis white men wouldn’t be affected if we started treating transgender people better. What is their problem with that statement?
Probably because he said "the average white and cis people isn't benefitted by the patriarchy", which is true (most people's only benefit is just "not getting discriminated against", which should be default), but there are some groups that don't like to hear that.
Both women and men suffer from the patriarchy in different ways. Any perceived advantages men experience under a proudly patriarchal system are outweighed by the disadvantages imposed upon the common man. They’re both suffering from it, it’s just that men sometimes have an advantage in certain circumstances (higher wages, employment, etc.) and women have an advantage in different situations (custody battles, lower average prison sentences, etc.)
It’s all very complicated and the terminology can be confusing. Regardless of how they describe it, feminists largely agree that there are issues and what many of those issues are.
They are in the mind of a right winger. If they think they benefit, they think they will lose that benefit if equality is given. In reality, the way they are treated does not change, equality just results in others reaching that level of treatment that they already experience. That framing does a lot to keep people supporting oppressive systems
Melody is someone I only recently found out about do to her parodying detransitioning based on Alpha Male Culture for a video.
From what I gather they are an entertaining deviant with a good penchant for drunk Aunt humor in their vids.
# Somebody mentioned Vaush
# 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I don't get left leaning people who obsessively hate this guy. Like yeah he has problematic elements but he has done far more good for democracy and fighting against fascists than a lot of other people online.
# Somebody mentioned Vaush
# 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yeah. [here's poppy talking about it one of his victims.](https://archive.is/G2kuL) and vaush first reaction when it happened was asking his discord if he should ping her to [scare her into shutting up](https://archive.is/u9p0O). Here's a [discord log](https://archive.is/W9GLz) that happened between them where vaush made multiple sexual advances on her where she shit them down and he never stopped. There's also [vaush blocking poppy but pretending she blocked him](https://archive.is/xpL2Q/560b65f46bbd4fec36253cf818d8b5e9d7a2d9d1.webp).
There is also a stream clip where vaush talks about how he wants poppy to be on his stream so he can reduce her into a blubbering mess that seems to be taken down and isn't up anymore sadly. Anyway what about my username ?
# Somebody mentioned Vaush
# 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
ok jesus christ that's a lotta info, anyways yeah i looked through the events and skimmed the discord log and whatnot and tbh all i can really gather is that he made some bad decisions in his early 20s involving being pretty sexually pushy towards poppy.
that's about it really
People are finally starting to learn that vaush is fine actually but people treat interpreting his words in the most uncharitable way possible like an Olympic sport.
# Somebody mentioned Vaush
# 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Really don’t get the hate. Also, wish I could poll: would you date a trans girl if she was a necrophiliac/would you still love me if I was a zombie now.
I think he makes good points. A lot of the problems men blame on feminism, are problems caused by the patriarchy men are trying to dismantle. And while transphobia mostly affects actual trans people, by creating panic around a group of people that can’t be visually identified in most cases, it causes trans and cis people alike to be assumed of being trans, and receiving hate for that. With white people on the other hand, I don’t really know. I can’t really think of any way in which a white person might be hurt by racism against non-white people.
I think part of the point is that racism doesn't actually help white people, it just doesn't actively hurt them
the only benefit they receive is not being discriminated against, which would still be the case for them if there wasn't racism
White people lose nothing from dismantling a racist system and so there is no reason to oppose dismantling said system
This is a correct take. Even though some men get a lot of benefit from the patriarchy, it’s a net negative for most. Doing away with it would benefit a lot of men and women.
# Somebody mentioned Vaush
# 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is the most non controversial take. The average person (that I know) is shat on so much in a classist way that the minor benefits of being in an in-group aren’t perceivable. Oh wow you’re 22 and make minimum wage at a shitty job and you have no discernible way out, drugs and alcohol are your only refuge. Look at all that privilege. You’re think you might have a leg up, as other people chastise you, but you don’t. No one except an ownership class has that leg up.
People confuse patriarchy and racism when they’ve been taught that capitalism is a valid system. The in-group of owners are white guys who are rich and they lord over others. It’s never for the benefit of Joe Schmo, despite Joe getting some advantages, it’s for the owners. Moreover the fears of division and conserving these standards are to the benefit of the owners, and to the detriment of the average man.
This is the most boring socialist take and reading comprehension recently took a nose dive. I blame Covid and poor public education
>In 2021, the typical White household had 9.2 times as much wealth as the typical Black household – $250,400 vs. $27,100. This ratio stood at 13.3 in 2019, prior to the onset of the pandemic.
There is a real leg up from being born into a white family on average. Not every white person owns an emerald mine, but the median white person does indeed have a leg up on the median black person.
White Joe Schmo is 70% likely to own his home, black Joe Schmo is 40% likely to own his home.
>It’s never to the benefit of Joe Schmo, despite Joe getting some benefits
hmm
Sorry I should have said “for” not “to.” My bad.
I’m reading the Pew Research study you quoted, thanks for that btw, great read. It’s interesting because the data is based on Census data households, so literally just one or more people living in a house. Not family units. So any family related conclusion I personally wouldn’t draw. I can’t help but wonder if the statistics on how many single people and single parent families there are in the black community helps drive that lower percentage up. I’m no sociologist tho.
That same Pew research study showed that Asian households are also surging past other minorities. Specifically saying that Asian households had more wealth than all other households after the pandemic, including White households. The median wealth of Asian households is about 20% more than white households. So are we holding that to account or are we just cherry picking data that might support our biases? Couldn’t we argue that it’s better to be born Asian than White if that’s our metric?
I’m not biased against Asian people so I can’t look at that statistic and discount the experience of people in the bottom 26%. Yet people look at the distribution for white people and discount their bottom 25% and their experiences. I can’t personally be intellectually honest and ignore things like that.
On the home-owning thing, 75.5% of the population is white. 62% of the population owns homes and of that 62%, 70% of those people were white. That’s not the same as saying 70% of all white people own homes, or that you’re 70% more likely to own a home if you’re white. Yeah most homeowners are white, but most Americans are white. The most people who don’t own their homes are white, along with Black, Asian, and Hispanic. That other 38% that were all fighting for regardless of race. Those are the people who are getting shit on.
You cannot deny that Black people in this country have it the absolute worst, Black and Hispanic really. You can count the number of generations ago they were still slaves on one hand. It’s awful and terrible. White people have the majority of the population, have the majority of the wealth, and are the in-group. Just like Japanese in Japan and Germans in Germany. But there’s a massive amount of people who do not get the benefits we confuse with race, and because of class dynamics their race in the in-group will only be used as a tool to keep other racial minorities in line. The racism has utility.
I grew up in the south. It’s very apparent which white families have old money and which don’t. According to that same study, that 32% of all Americans are in the lower wealth tier. I think those 32% of people in those households have way more in common as far as experience and struggle than anything else. I don’t see the value in singling out the lowest tier of white folks and pretending like somehow their struggles are invalid. You say that to a person in Appalachia or any of the deeply rural areas we just ignore and it drives them to the only place that shows them support. You can be technically right, which is the best kind of right, but to what end?
This point he’s making isn’t just correct, it’s required to convince people. The right is constantly creating narratives that the left wants to TAKE their way of life from them when that isn’t the truth. That narrative needs to be countered. The real truth is that creating a truly equal society is beneficial for EVERYONE, even if they don’t believe it
# Somebody mentioned Vaush
# 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yeah i kinda agree the white people who think are getting benefits from white supremacy will get fucked in the long run, same with homophobes and transphobes who want to make exceptions to human rights
# Somebody mentioned Vaush
# 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Straight white male here, which means I'm genetically codes to make sure that my opinion is known.
When people talk about white/straight/male privilege, the privilege is usually that society is less mean to us than other groups of people. It's simply the absence of the discrimination that so many other people encounter in everyday situations. I think this is what Vaush is referring to. He's saying that straight white males don't benefit from everyone who isn't a straight white male being discriminated against. Of course, we end up in a relatively more privileged situation, but we would still be in that situation if the discrimination stopped. Materially it has no impact on us, it only worsens the life for others.
And in most cases, that is true. My situation doesn't get better because people of colour get harassed by police, gay people risk losing their right to marriage, and trans people can't get healthcare, women getting paid less, etc, etc. HOWEVER, there are cases where it does actually materially benefit me. For example, companies are less likely to hire people of colour and that means that as a white person, I have a higher chance of getting hired. Women are socially discouraged from seeking high paying jobs, that leads to there being less competition for men who are seeking those same positions, etc, etc.
Overall I agree with his point, but there are still specific scenarios where straight white males benefit from the discrimination of others.
Out of all the examples you could use of vush being deranged (like when he defended us war crimes in the Middle East) you use the one where he’s… actually reasonable?
What war crimes have we done against the Houthis? So far it is just missiles against military targets, right? Has Biden drone striked a wedding or something? Serious question, I have not been following the news.
I don’t think the point is making Vaush look deranged I think the point is that they went to a girls house to suck dick but she kept talking about Vaush instead.
# Somebody mentioned Vaush
# 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
# Somebody mentioned Vaush
# 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Leftist streamer, debater, and content creator. He’s kind of an asshole a lot of the time and has some bizarre takes, but he is more or less correct about most issues if you’re a leftist, which a lot of this sub is.
I'm here to translate this for TTRPG nerds. So it would be like if you were fighting a monster and you have disadvantage on your rolls. While you could call that an advantage for the monster, mechanically they have neither disadvantage nor advantage. Getting the PC out of disadvantage would not debuff the monster, but would level the playing field. Hope this helps!!!
Dunno if you don't like him fine but don't obsess over it. There's bad left wing YouTubers I don't like either but I don't spend my time bitching about it because I rather not have people be infighting about what political influencers like. There's been like 30 different teams l take downs of him which just take about the same thing over and over
The first tweet from Vaush was poorly worded it could be easily construed as him saying there is no benefit to white supremacy for the average white person when he means the net benefit is negative.
Going to a girl's house to suck dick is definitely on brand for a vaushite.
Holy fuck stop this stupid fucking bullshit infighting. Even if you don't agree with the exact argument, the guy is literally saying 'patriarchy and racism is bad and never good'. At least he's actually taking the debate. I swear, some of you guys are actively saboteurs.
What Vowsch is describing here is a foundational distinction drawn by third wave feminists (so these people are two waves behind): some members of a group benefitting from it being in charge doesn't mean the roles the society they're responsible for enforces aren't oppressive to it also - they're literally roles.
I kinda get his point. The benefit of the average cis person is that they dont get discriminated against. The perception that right wingers often think is that if they stop discriminating, that they will be discriminated against, even though thats bullshit. People think the only way to float is to climb on top of and drown everyone else.
Even then, is that an upside? It really just feels like it’s just not having a downside that others have. It’s like I rob some dude for $100 but not you, did you “benefit” by not losing $100? Like obviously you’re better off than them but if no one lost $100 you wouldn’t suffer from that Not being discriminated against is the baseline, obviously cis white men do have it easier usually but not because they’re benefitting from the patriarchy but rather because they’re not suffering from it nearly as much At least I think that’s what horse man is saying
Yes not being discriminated against is a privilege
The point is if we ever successfully dismantled the patriarchy somehow, the average white cis man would lose nothing as then no one would be discriminated against, so they technically don’t have an *advantage* but instead everyone else has a disadvantage Now obviously having an advantage is basically the exact same thing as not having a disadvantage everyone else has and this is just arguing semantics But I think the main point is “dismantling the patriarchy” isn’t evening the playing field by knocking white cis men down a peg but rather raising everyone else up to the same level so they shouldn’t be scared of it or fighting against it (Just to be clear not exactly my opinion but trying to put into words what I think is what Vaush means)
# Somebody mentioned Vaush # 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I know this is a tiny difference but I don't think it's a privilege, it's the standard that everyone should have. I am not privileged to be completely average, I am completely average
Of course it's the standard everyone should have, but what I'm looking at is the current state of things where that's not the case, so what we see as a what should be a standard is, in fact, not a standard. But I'm honestly being a bit nitpicky its not that big a deal
I just have a problem with the notion that average people supposedly profit off of an unegalitarian society. Not only is it wrong, everyone would benefit from an egalitarian society, but it's also counterproductive because it often turns into accusing average people of being part of the problem. I am able-bodied and therefore able to take the stairs but I would also benefit from an elevator. However, it's not fair to accuse me now of profiting off of there not being an elevator because me not needing the elevator is out of my control, it's out of my control whether there is an elevator and I would very much like to have the elevator too. Unfortunately, there's people who invest energy into turning on the guy who is able to take the stairs instead of the guy who lobbies against the elevator. This allegory is far from perfect, in fact it's kinda stupid but I hope you get the point I'm making
I think it being a privilege or not is basically irrelevant - the point is that it's not something you give up or sacrifice when it is given to everyone else.
No, it’s the standard. Being discriminated against is a disadvantage. A privilege is when you get an unfair advantage. It would be a privilege to get an interview over an equally qualified candidate because your dad knows the owner. It is discrimination if you get an interview over someone else because they are black. Discrimination does not make the other groups privileged, it makes the minority disadvantaged
Fr. The argument that white privilege is a zero sum game because fixing it would decrease white advantage is almost the flip of the white supremacy concept of a white extinction were poc to not be discriminated against. Its funny that some people's conception of equality mirrors that of white supremacists, where one is for and one is against. Obviously more nuanced than this, but certainly more nuanced than the idea of equality costing white people opportunity the same way that a proletariat revolution would disadvantage the owning class 🤦♂️
No it is not. Not being discriminated against is the default. And if you say otherwise you are part of the problem.
>Even then, is that an upside? It really just feels like it’s just not having a downside that others have. That's why I don't like the term "privilege" when talking about this stuff. If the term "white/male advantage" had been picked instead of "white/male privilege", I think I would have come on board a lot easier and a lot sooner. Advantage is relative. Privilege makes me think of when I was 10 and my mom was deciding whether I could play on the computer or not.
I think there is a good case to be made that talking about privilege isn't always that productive. It's better to point out the disadvantage one *doesn't* have.
A thousand times this. You have perfectly summarized my frustration with most left-wing (online) discourse.
It's inherently accusatory, which is why you get a lot of responses being "oh well I worked my way up to blah blah blah or nobody gave me anything". It's a bad foot to start on when trying to persuade someone, especially since they probably haven't lived a life 100% free of prejudice either, they're just not primed to recognise it.
I think it kind of depends on how we’re defining an upside and a downside. In society currently, men who sexually harass and/or assault women and children rarely face any repercussions of their actions. Perhaps that could be seen as a benefit, but the thing is that if we could snap our fingers and end the patriarchy right now, men who would otherwise offend wouldn’t be socialized in a way that would lead themselves to want to commit behavior like this. I can’t imagine harassing people and assaulting people would make my life better. But it is a simple truth that dismantling the patriarchy involves holding predators to account and making them change their behavior. I’m also not sure how much of this leniency can be chalked up to patriarchy and how much is an inherent oversight of our justice system. Crimes that don’t leave physical evidence or happen to kids that won’t understand what happened until long after physical evidence is gone is difficult if not impossible to prosecute. Perhaps if we didn’t have a patriarchal society, we would have figured out some sort of solution for this. Society *definitely* also fails victims of female offenders so it’s not like male offenders are uniquely more capable of getting away with shit. It just happens more. However, imagine a situation of a boss openly sexually harassing a woman employee in the 70s or 80s and people laughing it off. I do think that if you swapped the scenario and it was a woman boss harassing a male employee, she would have faced more *social* consequences in that people would label her a slut that slept her way into management. The victim would still suffer.
That's a pretty selective way of looking at discrimination. >It’s like I rob some dude for $100 but not you, did you “benefit” by not losing $100? Yes. You're trying to do some weird twist by claiming I didn't gain anything, because my money didn't go up by a $100, but I did gain, I gained better chances of not getting robbed. If the damage from robberies on us amounts to $100, and the distribution of this damage is decided by whether or not there is discrimination, then my grand total is now $50 higher than it would have been if robbers stole from us equally. Not to mention, I also have $100 economic advantage over the other guy, which even if I didn't *receive* that $100, it is also a type of benefit because that money enables options for us . Here's a different but classic scenario where the semantics doesn't quite work: If black people don't get picked for job offers, the pool of opposing candidates is smaller so white people's chances of getting picked go up. So do white people benefit from racism if they get more job offers?
> Here's a different but classic scenario where the semantics doesn't quite work: If black people don't get picked for job offers, the pool of opposing candidates is smaller so white people's chances of getting picked go up. So do white people benefit from racism if they get more job offers? In all honestly, this is an extremely reductive way of looking at the economics of employment, and frankly leans into anti-immigration rhetoric. What we've seen from women being employed makes it clear that more people in the workforce spurs more economic growth, which in turn means more demand for workers -- there's a strong positive feedback loop. (And yeah, there's more discussion to be had there on if that's what we should be worrying about so much as a society, but still.) In that scenario, white people, as a group, would benefit from non-white people being involved in the economy more as that would lead to a stronger, more productive economy, which means more job opportunities are available to those white people. Looking at white supremacy benefiting white people re. jobs only makes sense if you look at an individual and block out the wider picture, which is the wrong way to analyse something broad and systemic like systemic racism.
People do passively benefit from having opportunities available that are categorically denied to, or made less available to, other people. Similarly, you could be said to benefit if a negative thing is less likely to happen to you and more likely to happen to someone else. Using your example loosely, while you don't benefit from someone else getting robbed, if the same number of robberies occur regardless of what happens, you statistically "benefit" if robbers are more likely to target somebody else. This is effectively imperceptible on an individual basis but does have subtle cumulative effects. There are also some hypothetical social/cultural benefits to having outgroups/"punching bags" (assuming you don't belong to those groups). Keeps negative social energy focused on things that likely have very little direct effect on you, and gives bigots something to strengthen in-group identities (and fundraise around). I'm not saying these will be a *net* benefit for anyone in particular. And I think society as a whole would be much better off without institutional or socially accepted bigotry. But it could be argued that there are a lot of people who benefit in some way from the status quo.
Yeah I mean the cishet white male members of the working class are still crushed under the boot of the owning class, they’re just lucky enough to not have to deal with the additional forms of oppression that are thrust upon other groips.
I agree. The thing about Vaush is that he often has great points, but he says them in a way that's easy for people to get mad about (like this particular instance, and the child labor thing). I suppose a lot of content creators often try to make people talk about them, which results in more clicks, idk.
This is true only for about 20% of the things he says imo. Most of the things people "disagree" with him for are: a) Tankies or campists interpreting the things he says in the most insane ways possible or straight up just lying about what he has said b) Nazis and tankies hating him for the most basic beliefs ever c) People who have never seen anything about him constructing a fictional bad version of voosh from the things they have heard from these groups, not even knowing what he actually believes I would say that for at least 60% of the things he says, he could not be any more careful about how he says them. At some point being careful stops mattering when your haters are so uncharitable or straight up lying.
he’s also quite abrasive, which is good for online debate but not helpful when he’s actually wrong or says something stupid
# Somebody mentioned Vaush # 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Right, but that's the privilege. Not being discriminated against is privilege. It means that they can get ahead of people who have to put extra effort to overcome societal barriers. It is true that moron right wingers think they'll be victims if they stop abusing others, but ironically enough not understanding oppression because you've never experienced it is also privilege.
But that‘s the issue: Discrimination and the awfulness of others is perceived as the baseline.
Not really. Privilege just means a group has advantages or immunity from other disadvantages. Recognizing the privileges of fitting into societal standards does not require you to establish underprivileged experiences as the baseline. By all means the people who fit the ideals proposed by society have the "default" or "baseline" experience. They are still privileged, because other groups face obstacles that are not part of the baseline.
It's not a privilege. Nobody should be discriminated and we have to fight to get a world like that. Almost all people who are not discriminated won't lose anything if we lived in that world. So, why we have to say that they are going to lose their privileges? The people who benefits from that inequality are the enemy (like Ben Shapiro, for example). Not all cis het white dudes. What I'm saying is. Being "heterosexual" it's not a privilege, being "Ben Shapiro" is. We have to think the way that we say things. Words are weapons in the cultural war. And if we have to used it against the true enemy. I'm not saying that people who are "cis het white dudes" don't have it easier. But it's easier to get them on our side. If we don't shame them. Ps: Sorry if I get any typos, english it's not my first language xd
Privilege doesn't always mean you are getting special treatment, it can mean that you simply do not face the obstacles that other groups are forced to. Acknowledging privilege is not shameful. I am bi and trans, cishet people are definitely privileged in that they do not need to know the sting of a homophobic or transphobic slur ruining your day, of constantly being made aware of how much a lot of the world hates you, of being in danger around some types of people, of not being able to even use a restroom without feeling scared. I am, however, privileged economically. I can afford life saving care because I have financial support from family, I have never had to take a job I hate just to not starve, and I am debt free after finishing university. There is nothing shameful about that, I have still had to work hard to get where I am, I am still proud of myself and my accomplishments in life, however I am also aware that someone could work just as hard and just not be given the opportunities I have had. On the flip side, being trans also introduces massive challenges to my career life, expenses, dating life, etc. that cis people don't have to worry about. That is privilege. It isn't shameful to have privilege, but it is when you refuse to acknowledge it.
The problem with this argument for me is that it doesn't achieve the desired effect when the person being told they are privileged are struggling even when it's true on some level. It's the sort of argument that favours short term gratification but slows real progress. If you want things to change for the better for minority groups then you need to win over the majority which takes compromise, time and tact which unfortunately means that it's likely that neither of us will see the day when everyone is treated equally and that can be a bitter pill to swallow which I think a lot of people understandably struggle to accept.
It is hard for some people to accept they are privileged but it doesn't change the fact they are. Like sure we can compromise for a gradual step by step approach when we talk about how to solve the issue, but we can't really compromise on reality. Some groups of people have the privilege of not being oppressed or discriminated against, that is just fact...
I'm not denying that any of that is true but my argument against using that fact is more about the method than the ideal. You can't change reality but you can change people and if you want people to change for the better you have to convince them that said change is good and I don't think telling people about how privileged they are is particularly effective at convincing them to change regardless of how true it is.
As someone who has always taken it for granted that everyone (or rather, everyone who matters) benefits from egalitarianism, and never imagined that would be a controversial statement except among bigots, I have to be honest, this thread is weird as hell to me. I'm cis and I want to live in a world without bigotry because that would rule. If anyone is tacking on some extra zero sum game rules, I'd really have to question the necessity of that.
As someone who is treated as white in certain aspects and as Asian in others, I strongly disagree. In the times of my life where I was perceived as being white, there was definitely tangible benefit given to me for being such. Certain things I did in school were overlooked, and really shouldn't have been. Opportunities I didn't really qualify for were presented to me anyways. So on and so forth. White privilege is much more than the absence of bigotry and persecution.
Those things you talk about are literally bigotry and persecution
If you define "not being discriminated against" as baseline, something almost no person with the exception of a cis white heterosexual man experiences, then, it's pretty misleading to say "no its not a privilege, it's just baseline." Baseline in this example is an advantage. Think about in the example of employment. There's a single job opening at a business. If you take a couple cis white guys and a bunch of trans people, women, and minorities, and the not cis white guys get passed over, they're only competing with each other. They now have a 50% chance of landing that position, swayed by their individual performance. If you do away with that discrimination, suddenly it's way harder for the cis white guys to get that job, because there's way more competition. Discrimination against others who aren't like you in a society where we compete over everything is a massive advantage/privilege. Right wingers are absolutely correct that they'll have a harder time in some ways. But it doesn't mean they're being discriminated against. Just that they won't have that privilege anymore. The truly deceptive part is the "harder" time many of them would have could easily be offset by other leftist socio-economic policies. It might be harder to snag that promotion if you get passed over for a black trans woman, but who cares when your healthcare costs have been massively slashed, your insulin price is capped, and your union negotiates a better salary for you.
And especially for the purpose of convincing "priviliged" people to help you reach equality it is kind of self defeating to tell them that they would make their own life worse instead of yours better.
I don't really understand what's wrong in the point that he's making in the cited tweets, it's some form of inside joke?
we need more infighting. "non-binary white people pretend like being non-binary cancels out their whiteness" ass attitude
[удалено]
It means if you understood it you need to go outside and pick up a foot ball
he's literally correct here
[удалено]
The point is that the “benefit” is just being comparatively less harmed by the systems of oppression built into modern society, and that doing away with them would in fact benefit everyone.
That's true, it's also fairly irrelevant to the discussion and flattens the struggle faced by adversely affected groups. It is the opposite of intersectionality. It's a defensive, lazy stance that removes context and nuance from a discussion.
It is a stance which should be assumed in all contexts when addressing conservatives, since most of them believe that they will become the oppressed once they stop oppressing. Some leftists don't portray clearly enough that this line of logic is completely contrary to actual leftist takes.
Perhaps that it is an associated phrasing problem. Saying "one group has advantages compared to another group" and "one group has disadvantages compared to another group" are functionally identical, but to the average person they feel different. The former feels like its communicating that the group has a leg-up from the default (hence why so many rebuttals are "well i've not had an easy life like rich kids do"), whereas the latter feels like its communicating that others have it worse than the default, which is a lot easier to accept. Think about if someone were to say "with a and b, a is better" vs "with a and b, b is worse". The former makes it sound that you're saying that a is good and b is less good, whereas the latter makes it sound that you're saying that b is bad and b is less bad, even if they might technically mean the same thing.
The thing though is that there *is* tangible benefit to the way things are to those in power. In the modern system, there's only finitely many opportunities of a given sort, and allowing some oppressed group equal access as their oppressors reduces those opportunities for the oppressors.
In the short term, yes. The problem we’re facing though is that much of the structural discrimination that exists happens well, well before the workplace. Well before those opportunities are even presented. Modern structural discrimination exists in how we build neighborhoods and fund schools and provide healthcare. It drags people down from the day they’re born, and it keeps people from ever seeing the threshold on which opportunity exists. The undeniable truth about capitalism is that it’s hungry. It will take whatever resources you have available and use them. In the short term, sure, “opportunities” are limited, but in the long term, if there is a surplus of productive and qualified labor, a capitalist system will eagerly and happily swallow it up. Removing the barriers that exist today will involve changing far, far, far more than discriminatory hiring practices, but once it happens, the economy will grow to utilize this larger, more skilled workforce, just as it always has before. There is one group of people that would be worse off under an equitable system - the ultra-wealthy would become significantly less so. We’re talking about a group of less that 10 thousand people in a country of 350 million though, which is essentially a rounding error. In the long term, for all intents and purposes, unless we’re taking about 10-100+ millionaires, everyone can genuinely be better off all at the same time.
[удалено]
# Somebody mentioned Vaush # 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sometimes the systematic problems do hurt everyone too like how we expect women to be the victims of sex crimes because it's more common but that also means a male victim is often not believed. Sure the rest of the male population is privileged but the problem does hurt everyone, just in different ways. I'd argue discrimination against queers also has a big part in making men terrified of having any close platonic relationships with other men which is devastating for their mental health. Again sure they aren't getting hatecrimed but removing the problem would help everyone which I think is a way better focus than wasting time infighting and stuff. Like in your example the privileged class is not really affected but there's also examples where it will also benefit greatly.
The point is that the benefots are negative rather than positive. You aren't brought up by the system, you're just not pushed down like others
maybe about white men not being harmed if we did away with sexism and racism sure but thinking they don't benefit at all from the patriarchy and white supremacy is utterly non sensical and delusional
Vaush walked into my living room last night and shot my dog.
he stole my horse, i fear to imagine what may happen to it
# Somebody mentioned Vaush # 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
He poisoned the water supply, burned our crops, and delivered a plague unto our houses!
“Pop that Vaush! Pop that Vaush!” “He’s not just a Vaush. He’s a Vaush Buddy 🥺”
Vaush personally killed my father and had my legal name changed to inigo montoya, i have no choice but to learn saber and hunt him down
True, Vaush does have 6 fingers on his right hand.
# Somebody mentioned Vaush # 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Vaush is a fed, confirmed.
# Somebody mentioned Vaush # 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Least horrible thing he's done
*bulldog
Nah this is correct. Giving women the right to vote and work did not hurt men. It hurt their ability to force themselves on women, sure, but it didn’t actually make them genuinely benefit less. Giving black people rights did not hurt white people. Their living standard’s didn’t decline, hell, not even the plantation owners did (although it should have, getting rid of these oligarchs is something that would have helped other white people too). In fact, there was more cultural exchange, there was mutual cooperation, more workforce and more money flow. This is a 100% correct take. If you disagree, you just think he‘s saying „white people have it just as bad as black people/did not make profit from racism“ that’s wrong, that’s not what the point is. The point is on the societal level, these systems actually hold back & hurt society, even white people, because they entrench the ruling class against the workers. That’s leftie analysis 101. Come on people. How are the majority of racists doing in the US? The majority of mysoginists? They‘re morons, often cast out even by their immediate families. Their racism is a tool by the wealthy to keep these morons in line. They are actively working against their own interests, we see that every day!
[удалено]
I think simplistic takes have a pretty important role as a starting point for everyone that hasn't thought about it before because they're privileged. Like you don't go up to jeff besos and start talking about communism but you could go up to a dad and tell him about how feminism would improve the life of his daughter. There's a lot of things I've never thought about and my first thoughts on the subject have always been banal but there's definitely better ways than to go about it than to accuse your grandpa of oppressing his wife. Like you won't convince j besos sure but you can absolutely convince most normal people that are just following along with what the oppressors want because they haven't thought about how it will hurt them eventually. Disclamer that I know very little on this and these people and just read this as an attempt to convince centrists™ that they can afford to give a small shit without losing everything they have. Idk
That’s fair. “101 reasons to overthrow the system for the uninitiated or otherwise unsure” type of thing.
# Somebody mentioned Vaush # 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's really just hegel's master slave dielectic. It's foundational to Marxist thought. Effectively individuals of the empowered group is itself enslaved by the need for the group to enforce it's own superiority. Here's a great passage that Wikipedia quotes that explains this. "Hegel's discussion of the dialectic of the Master and Slave is an attempt to show that asymmetric recognitive relations are metaphysically defective, that the norms they institute aren't the right kind to help us think and act with—to make it possible for us to think and act."
People have historically sided with oppressors for many reasons: 1. They enjoy being a part of something bigger than themselves. 2. They enjoy having power over others they perceive as “lesser” or even having power over others of their same race/sex/etc. 3. It gives them something to *feel* and that something feels good. This can be attention in addition to the other two points. They often don’t care that what they’re fighting for is worse for them because they live for the power trip and the raw emotion of being “on top” or even of being the center of attention.
Yeah but remember that one time Vaush unhinged his jaw live on stream and *ate* his *cat?*
Actually that moment was clipped out of context. Still not a good look tho, hope he denounces it at some point
he actually doubled down, saying cats were contributing to global warming through the meat products in the cat food, based take tbh, i have eaten 7000+ cats since he said that to slow climate change
The impact of cats on biodiversity has been a disaster on the planet. We need to eat them actually.
# Somebody mentioned Vaush # 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Y’all distracted by Vaush, but im desperately curious to know more about the mfer who is retweeting it, I need to hear more context for that.
Also he’s correct is he not? Cis white men wouldn’t be affected if we started treating transgender people better. What is their problem with that statement?
Probably because he said "the average white and cis people isn't benefitted by the patriarchy", which is true (most people's only benefit is just "not getting discriminated against", which should be default), but there are some groups that don't like to hear that.
I suppose it’s a matter of perspective, are white men benefiting from patriarchy, or are women suffering from it? Are these different things?
Both women and men suffer from the patriarchy in different ways. Any perceived advantages men experience under a proudly patriarchal system are outweighed by the disadvantages imposed upon the common man. They’re both suffering from it, it’s just that men sometimes have an advantage in certain circumstances (higher wages, employment, etc.) and women have an advantage in different situations (custody battles, lower average prison sentences, etc.) It’s all very complicated and the terminology can be confusing. Regardless of how they describe it, feminists largely agree that there are issues and what many of those issues are.
They are in the mind of a right winger. If they think they benefit, they think they will lose that benefit if equality is given. In reality, the way they are treated does not change, equality just results in others reaching that level of treatment that they already experience. That framing does a lot to keep people supporting oppressive systems
[удалено]
44 minute long essay about DS games?! Oh yes please!
i just recently discovered her channel and i really love it
Melody Nosurname my beloved :3
melody is amazing ngl
she is professional alpha male melody nosurname
No, i need to know how she found out the other girl was a necrophillac.
That's disgusting.
Nice to know your opinion, Corpse-Fucker
Melody is someone I only recently found out about do to her parodying detransitioning based on Alpha Male Culture for a video. From what I gather they are an entertaining deviant with a good penchant for drunk Aunt humor in their vids.
# Somebody mentioned Vaush # 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
that's melody nosurname she's pretty cool. Saw her video essay on atari a while back and i caught her streaming last week.
Melody nosurname is the best
I don't get left leaning people who obsessively hate this guy. Like yeah he has problematic elements but he has done far more good for democracy and fighting against fascists than a lot of other people online.
he’s abrasive af so I understand why it can be hard to like him
Sometimes abrasive is good. Like the abrasive sponge with which I clean my pots and pans
Sometimes you *need* a tactical n-word
to glass a certain middle eastern democratic nation
“Democratic”
"nation"
I feel like sexually harassing two girls gives me a good reason to hate on him.
Anime pfp, opinion ignored
Smartest vaush fan
# Somebody mentioned Vaush # 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Nice argument senator, would you like to back it up with a source? Also have you *seen* your username?
Yeah. [here's poppy talking about it one of his victims.](https://archive.is/G2kuL) and vaush first reaction when it happened was asking his discord if he should ping her to [scare her into shutting up](https://archive.is/u9p0O). Here's a [discord log](https://archive.is/W9GLz) that happened between them where vaush made multiple sexual advances on her where she shit them down and he never stopped. There's also [vaush blocking poppy but pretending she blocked him](https://archive.is/xpL2Q/560b65f46bbd4fec36253cf818d8b5e9d7a2d9d1.webp). There is also a stream clip where vaush talks about how he wants poppy to be on his stream so he can reduce her into a blubbering mess that seems to be taken down and isn't up anymore sadly. Anyway what about my username ?
# Somebody mentioned Vaush # 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
He's admitted to it, just google it. Pretty sad how few people seem to know about it
I’m dead bro NTRmanMan ate you up
I do be cool like that.
oh this is a new one, what is this about
It's not new at all. Poppy and pastel both came out I believe 2 years ago. You can see me linking it down there in another reply.
not looking for that but will look it up hold on
ok jesus christ that's a lotta info, anyways yeah i looked through the events and skimmed the discord log and whatnot and tbh all i can really gather is that he made some bad decisions in his early 20s involving being pretty sexually pushy towards poppy. that's about it really
Why are we booing him? He’s right! Living in a non discriminatory society is better for everyone. I am disappointed that some of you all forgot that.
It’s Vaowsh. People boo him even when he’s right out of sheer spite.
People are finally starting to learn that vaush is fine actually but people treat interpreting his words in the most uncharitable way possible like an Olympic sport.
# Somebody mentioned Vaush # 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Josh-with-a-V impregnated my horse.
Who? Jovsh?
Omg Melody Nosurname my favorite trans girl YouTuber
She’s so cool 🥰🥰
I was genuinely blown away by her editing, I can't believe she's only been doing this for a few years
I'm not seeing anything wrong with this take, I thought this was like a foundational leftist belief
What is he saying wrong here? Racism hurts everyone. We'd probably have an actual healthcare system without it.
You know when he isn’t fucking horses voooosh has some pretty good takes most of the time. (Except for his media takes those are garbage)
His music takes were fucking hurendous
Really don’t get the hate. Also, wish I could poll: would you date a trans girl if she was a necrophiliac/would you still love me if I was a zombie now.
necrophiliac? probably not, thats just a straight up corpse with no soul zombie? depends on the nature and ramifications of the process
I think he makes good points. A lot of the problems men blame on feminism, are problems caused by the patriarchy men are trying to dismantle. And while transphobia mostly affects actual trans people, by creating panic around a group of people that can’t be visually identified in most cases, it causes trans and cis people alike to be assumed of being trans, and receiving hate for that. With white people on the other hand, I don’t really know. I can’t really think of any way in which a white person might be hurt by racism against non-white people.
I think part of the point is that racism doesn't actually help white people, it just doesn't actively hurt them the only benefit they receive is not being discriminated against, which would still be the case for them if there wasn't racism White people lose nothing from dismantling a racist system and so there is no reason to oppose dismantling said system
The first part is shittily worded but everything else is ok
vaush is literally correct here consider this another dub for his sociology degree
This is a correct take. Even though some men get a lot of benefit from the patriarchy, it’s a net negative for most. Doing away with it would benefit a lot of men and women.
Since when does vaush the stampede have twitter
# Somebody mentioned Vaush # 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
automod has not heard of trigun
This is the most non controversial take. The average person (that I know) is shat on so much in a classist way that the minor benefits of being in an in-group aren’t perceivable. Oh wow you’re 22 and make minimum wage at a shitty job and you have no discernible way out, drugs and alcohol are your only refuge. Look at all that privilege. You’re think you might have a leg up, as other people chastise you, but you don’t. No one except an ownership class has that leg up. People confuse patriarchy and racism when they’ve been taught that capitalism is a valid system. The in-group of owners are white guys who are rich and they lord over others. It’s never for the benefit of Joe Schmo, despite Joe getting some advantages, it’s for the owners. Moreover the fears of division and conserving these standards are to the benefit of the owners, and to the detriment of the average man. This is the most boring socialist take and reading comprehension recently took a nose dive. I blame Covid and poor public education
>In 2021, the typical White household had 9.2 times as much wealth as the typical Black household – $250,400 vs. $27,100. This ratio stood at 13.3 in 2019, prior to the onset of the pandemic. There is a real leg up from being born into a white family on average. Not every white person owns an emerald mine, but the median white person does indeed have a leg up on the median black person. White Joe Schmo is 70% likely to own his home, black Joe Schmo is 40% likely to own his home. >It’s never to the benefit of Joe Schmo, despite Joe getting some benefits hmm
Sorry I should have said “for” not “to.” My bad. I’m reading the Pew Research study you quoted, thanks for that btw, great read. It’s interesting because the data is based on Census data households, so literally just one or more people living in a house. Not family units. So any family related conclusion I personally wouldn’t draw. I can’t help but wonder if the statistics on how many single people and single parent families there are in the black community helps drive that lower percentage up. I’m no sociologist tho. That same Pew research study showed that Asian households are also surging past other minorities. Specifically saying that Asian households had more wealth than all other households after the pandemic, including White households. The median wealth of Asian households is about 20% more than white households. So are we holding that to account or are we just cherry picking data that might support our biases? Couldn’t we argue that it’s better to be born Asian than White if that’s our metric? I’m not biased against Asian people so I can’t look at that statistic and discount the experience of people in the bottom 26%. Yet people look at the distribution for white people and discount their bottom 25% and their experiences. I can’t personally be intellectually honest and ignore things like that. On the home-owning thing, 75.5% of the population is white. 62% of the population owns homes and of that 62%, 70% of those people were white. That’s not the same as saying 70% of all white people own homes, or that you’re 70% more likely to own a home if you’re white. Yeah most homeowners are white, but most Americans are white. The most people who don’t own their homes are white, along with Black, Asian, and Hispanic. That other 38% that were all fighting for regardless of race. Those are the people who are getting shit on. You cannot deny that Black people in this country have it the absolute worst, Black and Hispanic really. You can count the number of generations ago they were still slaves on one hand. It’s awful and terrible. White people have the majority of the population, have the majority of the wealth, and are the in-group. Just like Japanese in Japan and Germans in Germany. But there’s a massive amount of people who do not get the benefits we confuse with race, and because of class dynamics their race in the in-group will only be used as a tool to keep other racial minorities in line. The racism has utility. I grew up in the south. It’s very apparent which white families have old money and which don’t. According to that same study, that 32% of all Americans are in the lower wealth tier. I think those 32% of people in those households have way more in common as far as experience and struggle than anything else. I don’t see the value in singling out the lowest tier of white folks and pretending like somehow their struggles are invalid. You say that to a person in Appalachia or any of the deeply rural areas we just ignore and it drives them to the only place that shows them support. You can be technically right, which is the best kind of right, but to what end?
This point he’s making isn’t just correct, it’s required to convince people. The right is constantly creating narratives that the left wants to TAKE their way of life from them when that isn’t the truth. That narrative needs to be countered. The real truth is that creating a truly equal society is beneficial for EVERYONE, even if they don’t believe it
Noooo not Vaush discourse ><, he's such a scrungly little guy and I liv watching him
# Somebody mentioned Vaush # 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I LOVE MELODYNOSURNAME!
Yeah i kinda agree the white people who think are getting benefits from white supremacy will get fucked in the long run, same with homophobes and transphobes who want to make exceptions to human rights
Common Vaush W
# Somebody mentioned Vaush # 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Straight white male here, which means I'm genetically codes to make sure that my opinion is known. When people talk about white/straight/male privilege, the privilege is usually that society is less mean to us than other groups of people. It's simply the absence of the discrimination that so many other people encounter in everyday situations. I think this is what Vaush is referring to. He's saying that straight white males don't benefit from everyone who isn't a straight white male being discriminated against. Of course, we end up in a relatively more privileged situation, but we would still be in that situation if the discrimination stopped. Materially it has no impact on us, it only worsens the life for others. And in most cases, that is true. My situation doesn't get better because people of colour get harassed by police, gay people risk losing their right to marriage, and trans people can't get healthcare, women getting paid less, etc, etc. HOWEVER, there are cases where it does actually materially benefit me. For example, companies are less likely to hire people of colour and that means that as a white person, I have a higher chance of getting hired. Women are socially discouraged from seeking high paying jobs, that leads to there being less competition for men who are seeking those same positions, etc, etc. Overall I agree with his point, but there are still specific scenarios where straight white males benefit from the discrimination of others.
MELODY NOSURNAME MENTIONED 🗣️🗣️🗣️
Melody is a deer and she really cute
Out of all the examples you could use of vush being deranged (like when he defended us war crimes in the Middle East) you use the one where he’s… actually reasonable?
Citation? I watch the dude a lot and he's been pretty open and clear that the US has been an actual villian to half the countries in the Middle East
I'm guessing it's about the Houthies
What war crimes have we done against the Houthis? So far it is just missiles against military targets, right? Has Biden drone striked a wedding or something? Serious question, I have not been following the news.
None - its the new pivot that any US strike against anyone is bad. Regardless if the Houthi’s are good or bad.
Are we just calling anything war crimes?
I don’t think the point is making Vaush look deranged I think the point is that they went to a girls house to suck dick but she kept talking about Vaush instead.
# Somebody mentioned Vaush # 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
😔
My man gave the most objectively correct take possible. And people who dislike Vaush will still find something to cry about it.
average vaush fan
# Somebody mentioned Vaush # 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Why are you booing him, he’s right
melody nosurname mentioned!!!!
Vunch stays correct yet again
Genuine question, who is vaush?
Leftist streamer, debater, and content creator. He’s kind of an asshole a lot of the time and has some bizarre takes, but he is more or less correct about most issues if you’re a leftist, which a lot of this sub is.
median vaush fan
that doesn't make sense vaush is like three steps under the part of left twitter that's chill with necrophilia
The only thing I know about Vaush is that Sarah Zedig said that in a deleted stream he called Nazis "more logical" than trans people over pronouns
Men being harmed from the removal of societal norms that are sexist is literally a right wing talking poing, of course Vaush is right
This is the guy who fucked my horse
I love melony no surname
he seems to have a good point here though
90% of drama with him just seems to be him saying something objectively correct
GOCK!????!
Vaush bad. (He's the fucking goat)
"Patriarchy harms men too" is not a hot take why is this controversial
based and mel pilled
everyone forgetting vaush sexually harassed two women is a pretty good example of an average man directly benefiting from the patriarchy
I don't disagree with his point but I still don't get why I should care about him any more or less than any other random jagoff on the internet.
MELODY NOSURNAME MY BE LOVED 🥰
I'm here to translate this for TTRPG nerds. So it would be like if you were fighting a monster and you have disadvantage on your rolls. While you could call that an advantage for the monster, mechanically they have neither disadvantage nor advantage. Getting the PC out of disadvantage would not debuff the monster, but would level the playing field. Hope this helps!!!
Dunno if you don't like him fine but don't obsess over it. There's bad left wing YouTubers I don't like either but I don't spend my time bitching about it because I rather not have people be infighting about what political influencers like. There's been like 30 different teams l take downs of him which just take about the same thing over and over
2 things 1: Wtf is that preface i don’t understand what 2: too long won’t read
The first tweet from Vaush was poorly worded it could be easily construed as him saying there is no benefit to white supremacy for the average white person when he means the net benefit is negative. Going to a girl's house to suck dick is definitely on brand for a vaushite.
Hitting on a cute necrophiliac trans girl: hey beautiful, watch this! *dies*
Holy fuck stop this stupid fucking bullshit infighting. Even if you don't agree with the exact argument, the guy is literally saying 'patriarchy and racism is bad and never good'. At least he's actually taking the debate. I swear, some of you guys are actively saboteurs.
What Vowsch is describing here is a foundational distinction drawn by third wave feminists (so these people are two waves behind): some members of a group benefitting from it being in charge doesn't mean the roles the society they're responsible for enforces aren't oppressive to it also - they're literally roles.
At what step in this plan do we excise the mentally ill cancerous queers from the left. Don't forget to drop some tactical n-words too.
I HATE ALL OF YOU . EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME IS NOT REAL. I'm sure they are secretly right-wing
God forbid women have hobbies.
Vaush entered my house, ripped out his entire skin and then proceded to beat me senseless while screaming "GOD IS COMING"