Whites, men, and heterosexuals are ignorant and uneducated.

Non-white minorities, women, and homosexuals are knowledgeable and educated. However, the power of knowledge is not enough to bring down systems of oppression.

Women know more about men than men know about women. Non-white minorities know more about whites than whites know about non-white minorities. Homosexuals know more about heterosexuals than heterosexuals know about homosexuals. Women, non-white minorities, and homosexuals are on average more knowledgeable and educated about sexism, racism, and homophobia than men, whites, and heterosexuals, respectively.

On average, the oppressed group’s understanding of their oppression is cognitively complex and well-developed, while the oppressor group’s understanding of how they oppress is superficial and undeveloped at best, non-existent at the worst. Yet sexism, racism, and homophobia remain.

Additionally, the oppressor group assumes that the oppressed group is oppressed because they are uneducated and unknowledgeable about issues of gender, race, or even the nature of their own sexual orientation. The oppressors assume that they themselves are in power because they are more educated and knowledgeable, and that they have a responsibility to “teach” or confer knowledge to those who are oppressed. They assume that the oppressed are the ones who need to change. They assume that the oppressed needs to change and become more like men, whites, and heterosexuals.

It is the oppressors that need to change, to learn, and to educate themselves. Unfortunately, the oppressor group tries to ‘help’ the oppressed without even this basic piece of knowledge. They are ignoramuses in this knowledge domain, but they are too ignorant and prejudiced to consider this possibility.

About these ads

15 Responses to “Whites, men, and heterosexuals are ignorant and uneducated.”

  1. Michael Says:

    Where did you get your data for your premise? What types of questions were asked that led to this premise? Interesting study.

  2. Restructure! Says:

    Thank you for your feedback. I guess I was being a bit lazy with this post.

    Here is my reasoning:
    1. Women are overrepresented among feminists.
    2. Therefore, there is a higher proportion of feminists among women than among men. (From 1)
    3. Feminists know more about sexism than non-feminists.
    4. Therefore, women, on average, know more about sexism than men. (From 2 and 3)

    The same would apply to non-whites and racism. Non-whites are overrepresented among antiracists, and antiracists know more about racism than non-antiracists.

  3. Michael Says:

    You said: “Here is my reasoning:
”
    Something to think about underneath each point.
    1.Women are overrepresented among feminists.
    1a. Men are overrepresented among scientists.
    2. Therefore, there is a higher proportion of feminists among women than among men. (From 1)
    2a. Therefore, there is a higher proportion of scientists among men than among women. (From 1)

    3. Feminists know more about sexism than non-feminists.
    3a. Scientists know more about science than non scientists.
    4. Therefore, women, on average, know more about sexism than men. (From 2 and 3)
    4a. Therefore men, on average, know more about science than women.

    It seems where the logic breaks down is point 3.

  4. Restructure! Says:

    Hmm, interesting. I think 3a is correct, but 4a from 3a is problematic, because scientific literacy is not limited to scientists. It’s possible that the general population of women are more educated in science but don’t become scientists. However, it’s also possible that 4a is true, although it would not follow from 3a.

    I’m not sure ‘scientist’ can be substituted for ‘feminist’, as being a scientist requires that scientific institutions accept you as a scientists; it requires more financial investment and social acceptance, etc. However, being a feminist requires only self-identification as a feminist, and they can range from being minimally informed to exhaustively informed about feminism, but all would have a tendency towards learning more about feminism and sexism.

  5. chinesecanuck Says:

    Big generalization here. Non-whites know more about whites IF THEY’VE BEEN EXPOSED TO WHITES OUTSIDE OF TELEVISION. Seriously, my grandmother, who has been in Canada longer than I’ve existed doesn’t know much about white culture, other than what she’s seen on TV. In fact, she seems to think that a lot of young women are like Paris or Britney! The concept of “old WASPiness,” such as debutante balls and stuff like that are completely foreign to her (as they are to most Chinese Canadians…probably because deb balls are almost dead in Toronto.)

    Using your logic, you could also say that non-Christians know more about Christians than vice-versa. My boyfriend is Jewish. He would know that a Catholic service and a Southern Baptist service is different, but he might not be able to tell you which one is which. It would be even more difficult if it’s a Roman Catholic and High Anglican service (the only way he could tell that the service is Anglican, rather than Catholic is if the priest it is a woman.)

  6. Restructure! Says:

    Come to think of it, my grandma has also been in Canada for longer than I’ve existed. She probably doesn’t know very much about white culture, although I still think the average white person knows even less about her culture. Hey, even I know very little about her culture.

    Yes, I think that non-Christians know more about Christians than vice-versa, on average. You’re focused on how your Jewish boyfriend finds it difficult to distinguish between different sects of Christianity, but can you, in turn, distinguish between the different sects of Judaism?

  7. chinesecanuck Says:

    Just by looking? Well, I would know that a service ISN’T Orthodox if I see men and women sitting TOGETHER. If I see a woman leading a service or prayers, it’s also NOT ORTHODOX. If there’s more English/local language in the service, then once again, it’s not Orthodox. Difference between Reform and Conservative? Harder to tell. As for actual differences, it’s how scripture is interpreted. Orthodox Jews believe that G-D gave Moses the Torah, while other sects believe that it was written by humans.

    Is your grandmother’s culture from a very specific part of China? If so, I’d say that the average Hong Konger wouldn’t know much about his/her ancestral province/village’s culture(s) either.

  8. Restructure! Says:

    Yeah, but that stuff about Orthodox Jews is pretty obvious, the same or a bit more obvious than telling that the service is not Catholic if the priest is a woman.

    I don’t even know much about Hong Kong culture.

  9. Terrance L. Hordges Says:

    *[See ABOVE written comments!]

  10. Anonymous Says:

    Most of the opinions/views expressed were right on point! However, there are two points that I would add to this dialogue. First; by virtue of circumstance AND necessity; non-whites; blacks in particular; are forced to learn about whites because blacks; for the most part; do not live in a vacuum within American society. This is especially true in the areas of employment and education/higher learning. The reality is that; within American society, whites ARE the dominant group! Furthermore, what seems glaringly absent in these discussions on the topics of racism [white supremacy] and sexism as a “power relationship”, one that has historically favored european males. This global dynamic has been an institutional creation that impacts every area of people activity [ i.e. economics, education, entertainment, labor, law, politics, religious, SEX, and war]; and has been in place for the last four-hundred plus years! Perhaps, it is with this heightened understanding the we can confront the many “isms” that we face.

  11. Anonymous Says:

    Terrance L. Hordges [ a.k.a. "anonymous", 7/1/08 ]

  12. karen Says:

    “Additionally, the oppressor group assumes that the oppressed group is oppressed because they are uneducated and unknowledgeable about issues of gender, race, or even the nature of their own sexual orientation.”

    This seems backwards to me. The men I’m surrounded by (in a work environment and at So. California university) walk on eggshells around the topics of gender, sexuality, racism, presumably to avoid conflict. From my perspective, it’s a direct result of modern feminism. Their hostility has pushed men to become one of two extremes: arrogant, defensive, jerks and impotent, broad-shouldered doormats. Thanks a lot, ladies.

  13. Restructure! Says:

    Their hostility has pushed men to become one of two extremes: arrogant, defensive, jerks and impotent, broad-shouldered doormats.

    So are you saying that men were much better back in the day, before women’s lib?

  14. JacK Says:

    I’m afraid it’s you that is coming out as both ignorant and arrogant here. I would prefer the words repressed (restrict freedom) to oppress (acting cruely against). In this day of age however, women are just as much the ‘opressors’ – in society.

    You also seem to blame all homophobia on men as if women are incapable of it. I have one things to say to that: bullshit. Just like your complete post, your feminazistic ideologies and liberal garbage.

    Have a nice day.

  15. Restructure! Says:

    You can learn what ‘oppression’ means here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oppression

    I never blamed all homophobia on men. Try re-reading the article and point to where I have said this. Also, you may want to learn about the meaning of the word ‘respectively’.

    Thank you.


Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 81 other followers

%d bloggers like this: