Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Finally, An App That Splits The Bill So That White Men Pay More Watch

    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    smart, but white men would just refuse to go out and eat with anyone else if they pull this app out.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    What can one answer to someone who admits he cannot see past his privilege accusing others of making up discrimination?
    That's a decent misrepresentation, out of context it almost looks convincing. You are the only person in the conversation criticising people for what they are not who they are and pretending I 'admitted' anything because you can't validate the concept so would rather accuse others of being closed minded. What you mean is you have no sensible response so instead of providing any validity to your idea you're insulting someone personally because you can't validate the generality.

    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    Its not a buzzword, its a well-documented societal issue.
    (a) In that context its a buzzword by definition so you're misrepresenting
    (b) But the person purporting it cant justify or even provide reference to an issue which if it is 'well documented' should be easy to do
    (c) Well documented by whom? High flying professionals who are pioneers in their field or gender studies departments
    (d) Where is the evidence? This principle of privilege is illogical in principle because it essentially establishes your situation is less important than your birth characteristics which is completely ludicrous because if it had such a massive effect the sampling would be constant ie the advantaged people would be advantaged in all instances not just some. For examples see Tre Melvin who thinks his $1m dollar self is 'less privileged' than a homeless white person (his words)
    (e) It's cart before the horse. 99% of Nigerian TV is black. Is that structurally racist against whites? Are they privileged just by right of being a majority? If no then its a racist supposition as its only applied to white people, if yes then what is your solution for world parity of races regardless of personal choice and how is such a theory not reductionist
    (f) How can complex socio-cognitive interactions be boiled down to simply one is white the other isn't? It sounds stupid prima facie and dressing it up with academic language doesn't make it any more sensible that a privileged class also suffer in their own system and are the only class not to be promoted in their own society (affirmative action, the BBC BAME only apprenticeship etc) as well as often being worse off than those supposedly 'less privileged' which apparently is a birth right by what people are despite the data being so spread out as to make identifying a trend in any scientifically valid method impossible unless you ignore history and the fact a majority x colour country has its most influential people and class made up of x colour group which is the sensible explanation as to their 'overrepresentation' (alongside the fact they're a landed class or inherited from such so are often either very rich or middle class rich from birth. Not many working class origin CEO's around)
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aria Enoshima)
    If you look on the apps website (http://equitableapp.com/about/), you can see its satire
    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    Yes, AFAIK it was originally satirical
    It would be satire if she was criticising the discriminatory view of equality that the regressive left extol. But it's the opposite; she agrees with the app and she has a website devoted to "mapping privilege". Presenting something in comedic fashion doesn't make it satirical and their website is quite clear:

    When it's time to split the bill, EquiTable helps you avoid the entrenched discrimination that exists in our society. It doesn't split the bill equally—it splits it equitably. You pay what you should to balance out the wage gap.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GonvilleBromhead)
    That's a decent misrepresentation, out of context it almost looks convincing. You are the only person in the conversation criticising people for what they are not who they are and pretending I 'admitted' anything because you can't validate the concept so would rather accuse others of being closed minded. What you mean is you have no sensible response so instead of providing any validity to your idea you're insulting someone personally because you can't validate the generality.
    No, just a summary of what you wrote, accusing them of feeling discriminated even though in your eyes they are not. Not a misrepresentation at all.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    No, just a summary of what you wrote, accusing them of feeling discriminated even though in your eyes they are not. Not a misrepresentation at all.
    Your summary of my saying you are being discriminatory for accusing white men as a group and a whole collectively of something which is bigoted by the definition as you are judging them all as one without any respect for individuality or difference is...that an unqualified 'them' feel discriminated against but are not which is somehow a privileged statement for some reason.

    This would be a lot easier if you even tried to back up anything you say.

    I'm presuming this is accipiens ex adverso - the principle being because I don't inherently believe in the concept of privilege then I somehow don't believe discrimination exists? That's ridiculous. The first doesn't presuppose the second. Further its not an 'accusation' - feeling discriminated against is subjective, so it's not an accusation it's an accurate summary of their position but I'm debating the validity as presented ie all white people inherently discriminate and therefore are privileged which is your position, which ironically is discriminatory.

    But rather than try to prove your position or engage in any conversation you've gone from ad hominem attacks to misrepresentation which is a 'summary' (if said summary was what you genuinely took from what I said then I'd work on your critical analysis skills) of a point I never made and a position that I not only don't hold but also doesn't logically make sense. You can't 'accuse' someone of subjectively feeling something when they say they feel it because they objectively feel it. This is why 'feel' makes for bad evidence.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    But its an interesting discussion topic
    No, it isn't. It's thoroughly uninteresting, social justice warrior drivel.
    Online

    18
    ReputationRep:
    This is dumb as ****.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by XOR_)
    This is dumb as ****.
    Jeff Goldblum would agree.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    (Original post by Wōden)
    No, it isn't. It's thoroughly uninteresting, social justice warrior drivel.
    Like it or not, SJWs are a very relevant topic in the world today, especially for us students.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.