General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums'Wypipo' Explained
By Michael Harriot
Lately there has been an uptick on the internet in the use of the term Wypipo. While I prefer to use the colloquialism Y. P. Pull (in my opinion, it has a more refined, formal, almost European tone to it), it is impossible to ignore that the former wording has become more accepted in widespread usage.
snip
What is Wypipo? Wypipo is an alternative, partly phonetic spelling of the words White People.
snip
Do tell. How so? Well, first of all, Wypipo say shit like do tell, whereas there are a number of white people who would never utter that phrase. To understand fully, you must come to terms with one fact:
Not all white people are wypipo.
The two should not be confused or used interchangeably.
snip
Most white people love animals, but wypipo will kiss their dog in the mouth and feed them with the same silverware they are eating with. While it would be wrong to lump all white peoples motives towards humans and nonhumans together, wypipo generally love animals more than they love people. Wypipo can see an unarmed bullet-riddled black body leaking blood in the street and feel no empathy, but will be outraged upon hearing that someone mistreated a house cat. Wypipo steer clear of black neighborhoods and dont think about the economic and social remnants of segregation on black youth, but will show up at Sea World with picket signs to protest the captivity of killer whales.
Read More: http://neguswhoread.com/wypipo-explained/
........................
Read on and understand not all white people are wypipo. Not all white people, I am one. We have huge racial issues that we all need to deal with. We need to be woke.
enki23
(7,793 posts)But yes, it's still a bit gross. And absolutely yes, it will be seized upon as an excuse to ratchet up the racial derogation for a greater fraction of the other side. And finally, there's a reason the arguments defending it take exactly the same form as the "well, there are black folk, and then there are n------" bullshit one tends to hear from racist asshats. Because, power imbalance, and history aside, it *is* exactly the same. Yes, those things should matter. But they won't. Not to most people who hear it. And no good will come of it.
I think some people are doing that self consciously, as sort of a subtle argument against the racist asshat position. But it appears some are just fucking clueless. And most of the people who hear it will hear the clueless version anyway. So it hardly matters.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)hell "the greater fraction" has been used for generations by wypipo. This trying to get fear infused into AA by stating WE will catch MORE hell from white people is bunk. "Exactly the same", no it isn't nor has it ever been so. Institutional and systemic racism makes that claim b******t
Cary
(11,746 posts)I don't see this advancing the cause. That's just my opinion. We have a Nazi in the White House who thrives on chaos and distraction. This particular tactic plays into his strategy.
I hope I'm wrong.
7962
(11,841 posts)ProudLib72
(17,984 posts)I thought my student had come up with that until Harriot used it.
Bok_Tukalo
(4,397 posts)The word is hostile and accusatory. Mr Harriot is articulating negative values and placing them on people of a specific race. He is not talking about Asians, or other racial groups, who "love animals more than they love people" (assuming you believe they exist and the moral flaw is not confined to people of primarily European decent). It is specific subset of that group; "white" people who "love animals more than they love people."
Find me its equivalent as a description of people, or an individual, of any other race where it is not considered pejorative.
sheshe2
(86,868 posts)Yep, he is doing that. Though says specifically, not all white people
Hostile? You wish to talk hostile about a word? Seriously? How about the hostile and inhuman acts we did to them over a century. How about slavery? Beatings? Lynching's? Rape? What we did was hostile and inhumane and you wish to discuss a word. How about the negative values that were placed on slaves, both men and women? Talk about negative values, they were rated when they were sold.
Atticus
(15,124 posts)Bok_Tukalo
(4,397 posts)You are making the argument that the pejorative is deserved.
George II
(67,782 posts)Bok_Tukalo
(4,397 posts)The current logomachy over the word wypipo is whether or not it is a race based pejorative. I made the case it is; I assumed people arguing with me are making the case it isnt a racial pejorative.
Are you saying it is self evident?
nolabels
(13,133 posts)The echo chamber of civilization that reinforces what we see in the rippled waves that wash over us always wants to reinforce what has gone before. Those, whoever they might be, who want to castigate people into the "wypipo' do have a point. Then also, while wanting to blame any parties involved people might also want to remember some of it wasn't all personal choice. Not making an excuse for people who find it convenient to be ignorant but more of the reason that this is a topic.
Some get to see their way past it and see how it gets there. Then others just go with the flow because they are just lazy swimmers and think it will not matter for them.
P.s: I do love that book in your sig-line, I wish everybody would read or listen to it
Bok_Tukalo
(4,397 posts)He gets a bit cheerleader for Buddhism but it doesnt interfere. I love the book. It impressed me a great deal.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)sl8
(16,189 posts)Bok_Tukalo
(4,397 posts)LOL
heaven05
(18,124 posts)you mean. The whitesplaining and rationalizations used to make AA racist for using wypipo is ludicrous. All I have to say is institutional and systemic use of racism is in the hands of ONE RACE ONLY. And that race continues to apply that power whenever and wherever it can be applied. Stop the whining about wypipo. Start whining about a Trayvon Martin, Tamir, Rice, Tanesha Anderson, Yvette Smith, unarmed and killed by authorities of the state, and Starbucks reaction to AA in that particular store. Wypipo is not an epithet. Like the word n****r. PERIOD.
ismnotwasm
(42,417 posts)ProudLib72
(17,984 posts)There are wypipo shenanigans all over this thread.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Who authored: "Why I Could Never Vote For Hillary Clinton" during the campaign.
And who said that Hillary Clinton "doesn't mind using Black America as chattel"
oberliner
(58,724 posts)That policy does not seem to be consistently applied.
RhodeIslandOne
(5,042 posts)It might be for all the wrong reasons.
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)heaven05
(18,124 posts)is about wypipo. Not the author of an article. Wypipo is a colloquialism, nothing more, nothing less. Yet n****r is not. It a hate inducing word created by wypipo to stimulate evil in racist wypipo. I am VERY UPSET about that word. Tell all your associates and friends, if they use it, to stop. Then wypipo may stop. Naw. Never happen. Fits a whole crowd of 'deplorables' for sure and those hiding in a closet. Wypipo, grow up. It fits. Thank you Root for this article.
Drahthaardogs
(6,843 posts)And later proven to have egg all over their faces.
People like that??? Are those the kinds of people you think should not be allowed to post here?
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Bashing Al Franken should not be permitted here.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)here didn't vote for Hillary. Many white people who post, posted that very sentiment here, still post here.
RhodeIslandOne
(5,042 posts)heaven05
(18,124 posts)huh....
Docreed2003
(17,631 posts)-signed a white, honkey, cracker ass cracker..
(The outrage and tears in this thread are just hilarious to me, and yet highlight the point perfectly!)
BumRushDaShow
(140,481 posts)I never understood why the term "honkey" is still used. It's just so '60s (although I know "cracker" goes way way back).
Docreed2003
(17,631 posts)The only reason I know that word is because my dad loved "Airplane" and old school SNL when I was a kid...so between the classic Richard Pryor sketch and that film, I guess I picked it up from there...the only time I've ever heard it used in recent years is on the Dave Chapelle show, which was heavily inspired by Pryor.
BumRushDaShow
(140,481 posts)Limpballs uses it all the time to try to make idiotic points, so I know it does get used, but he never used or picked up any of the newer "slang" terms.
But Airplane was some funny ass shit. And sortof related to that, I finally finally saw Leslie Nielsen in a "serious" role in "Forbidden Planet" (for the first time a couple years ago although the movie came out 60-some years ago).
The one thing about some of these terms is when both groups use them for a similar meaning. You see "cracker" used here as part of a term and similarly represents the type of thing the OP is describing -
heaven05
(18,124 posts)wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)I never met a slave in my life.
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)and Presidents Day.
History isnt a smorgasbord. You cant cherry pick the parts you want to own and pretend the other parts are irrelevant.
sheshe2
(86,868 posts)Beartracks
(13,453 posts)It's just name-calling.
=======
sheshe2
(86,868 posts)I put it in the same category as "Rednecks." Or what my family was called by a neighbor when we moved into our new house when I was a baby: Dagos. Or was it Wops? Hmm, maybe Goombahs? No, maybe it was Greasers.
The intent is clear when using a name. Maybe it makes people feel good to use the name. Maybe it makes them feel powerful. Nonetheless, it's snide.
Drahthaardogs
(6,843 posts)A well known poster called Scaramucci one and then proceeded to tell everyone why it was not racists.
It got lots of Recs.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)fear much? Cause you are whitesplaining and rationalizing white racism too much.
wonkwest
(463 posts)Trying to invent a new racial slur on the internet against one group isn't as cute as this author seems to think it is.
It seems this is a converse of the old racist meme "There are black people and there are n-----."
Neither sentiment is remotely ok.
It's weird to me that some people are comfortable with this kind of content being posted here. Our side is supposed to be better.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)except to those who use slurs that are racist
wonkwest
(463 posts)Then it's not up to you to say, really. Just as I don't decide for you what terms you should and should not be ok with or consider a slur against your ethnicity.
I don't allow straight people to let me know what gay-related pejoratives I should be ok with either.
Accord the respect to others you would demand for yourself. It's not a difficult concept. White people who are not racist have expressed very respectfully that they dislike the term and are not comfortable with its use.
The end. No, "But, but, but it's different!" You know who thinks that way?
Wypipo.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)fit the category understood by me as a racist sub-group of whites from many European ethnicities.
In ameriKKKa now I just have to listen to the conversation(s) at the 'farmer's market' to hear more native Europen language(s) being spoken than I have ever heard. I am 70.
Now to you being offended/confused by the classification term, American wypipo in relation to people from many ethnicities in the white race. I say wypipo's is fair and balanced a term that gives recognition and classification to hateful racist white people who DO NOT reflect the racism that has been poisoning the well water of this society since it's goddamn inception based on genocide and slavery. Which has represented to me, historically, as white people trying to get a classification on the red and brown skin people(s), that is still in use and as of 2018, on steroids, by the classification of a sub-group of white people, headed by d.trump who is doing a hell of a lot of pardoning to let his russiagate co-conspirator wypipo know, don't talk, I will pardon you. It really is pretty simple. There are allies and then there aren't. A classification ability, hate looks, spitting in ones direction and presence keeps me safe when in interactions on the street with the whole of society's white people and wypipo. What should an adherent of David DUKE, D'nish d-sousa, donald trump, steve bannon, gorka, alec jones et al; be classified as, I ask you? Racist? Bigoted? Prejudiced? THE waffle House shooter was wypipo. Every hateful racist coward hiding behind a badge and state authority who kills/murders/executes/imposes fatal summary judgement on ANY unarmed AA for BS like j-walking, not being respectful enough, speaking one's mind about an obviously racially profiled stop, killed for having a licensed weapon, undrawn and unthreatening, walking through one's own community, with things bought from the stop and rips, having a phone in hand whether they be raised or not. These are wypipo and I SHALL stick with the classification.
The open hostility shown to me by white persons now is much more prevalent than say 6-7-8 years ago. I mean let's get real here, I can't move faster than a snail in a wheelchair and white people, in cars, in stores, see me, don't know me or my experience from adam, locking their car doors, clutching that purse pretty defensively there.....it's fear of black from all fox news is filling their receptive minds with.
For your information I'm bi-racial. I don't stand for ugly from any race or culture. And will call out AA on any unreasoned hate as I will a potential Vegas or Parkland shooters. Two wypipo for sure.
And I will tell any white person anything I deduce about their racism and/or racial hostility especially if directed to me or mine or unjust behaviour or language against different cultures, NOT European. Brother Harriot is right on. No matter your umbrage at an AA making a definition fit the crime. It really was just slang for white people.
Hey 'it' hit as a definition of a sub-culture of all those white new and old immigrants speaking different Europen languages, who hate on race and class because ameriKKKa teaches white people how to become wypipo. One of our posters here had a huge thread when that poster referred to wypipo from an article that poster had read at the theroot.com.
https://thegrapevine.theroot.com/roseanne-barr-says-she-begged-abc-to-let-her-make-amend-1826477697 wypipo, for sure.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jun/01/from-black-panthers-to-bbq-becky-the-displacement-of-black-oakland
Have a good one
wonkwest
(463 posts)Racist white people rationalize their shittiness.
You're trying to rationalize shittiness.
Don't.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)I could ask you to do the same thing, but.....I won't. I had a lot of fun with this OP and you.
wonkwest
(463 posts)"Why don't people hear me?"
Because you're rationalizing shittiness. But, I feel like this is going to remain a deep mystery for you for some time to come.
And then you'll blame everyone else.
Carry on. Apparently you believe this model works for you.
Duppers
(28,220 posts)This hit a lot of my buttons.
WhiskeyGrinder
(23,623 posts)Devil Child
(2,728 posts)WhiskeyGrinder
(23,623 posts)Huh.
Eliot Rosewater
(32,403 posts)I cant say the W word, if I do I get tons of unwanted attention.
John Fante
(3,479 posts)WhiskeyGrinder
(23,623 posts)sheshe2
(86,868 posts)dumbcat
(2,128 posts)Who do you hope that? Sensitive?
Bok_Tukalo
(4,397 posts)... expressed by tribal conservatives when faced with rhetorical pushback they cant effectively refute.
It is simply malicious ridicule instead of reasoned argument.
WhiskeyGrinder
(23,623 posts)I often use the term myself to describe butthurtedness when I see it. "Butthurt" is a jocular term that means "annoyed all out of proportion to the supposed offense."
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)we are immediately labeled as such. See how that works? Gosh, I am not real wild about my dog kissing me on the mouth, but she does sleep on my bed. Horror of horrors! I had no idea my love for my animals meant I was a disgusting racist. Oh the shame!
Docreed2003
(17,631 posts)I mean, it's glorious! The pretzels people are twisting themselves into to justify their posts against this are just incredible. I say this with total seriousness as a pasty white, cracker ass, honkey...white people gonna white people.
sheshe2
(86,868 posts)Docreed2003
(17,631 posts)My wife made a "white people" joke at dinner tonight and I just had to lol!!!! And she has not clue about this "controversy"!
sheshe2
(86,868 posts)Docreed2003
(17,631 posts)She's waaaaay cooler than I am and I'm lucky to have her!
sheshe2
(86,868 posts)Devil Child
(2,728 posts)Not all white people are wypipo.
The two should not be confused or used interchangeably
Switch white to anything else and there would be almost universal scorn and derision for such a thought process. Embracing derogatory racial labels and stereotypes does no one any good. Rationalize it all you want but at the end of the day it remains fundamentally racist.
ismnotwasm
(42,417 posts)Racialization
Whiteness
White Privilege
What is Racism
What You Need To Know
Understanding Whiteness
To understand the history of the ideology of race,' and combating racism today, involves understanding (and challenging) whiteness' as the foundation of racial categories and racism.
At first glance, it may seem that in common usage in Alberta, the word white' is used to refer specifically to skin colour' or race.' Initially, this might seem like reverting back to, or reinforcing, the old (and racist) categories of European imperialism, and in some cases, it may in fact be meant that way! (We are profoundly concerned, for example, by the increase in neo-Nazi/white supremacist activity in our province.) In our experience, however, we have found that when people refer to white people' (either in self-identifying, or identifying individuals/groups), it is in fact being used as a shorthand reference to whiteness, about which people may have varied understandings you will need to clarify. In other words, it is being used as a shorthand for the privileges/power that people who appear white' receive, because they are not subjected to the racism faced by people of colour and Indigenous people.
As with the term race,' it is important to clarify the differences between "white" (a category of race' with no biological/scientific foundation) and "whiteness" as a powerful social construction with very real, tangible, violent effects. Here are some useful definitions of whiteness,' followed by a list of its key features:
Racism is based on the concept of whiteness--a powerful fiction enforced by power and violence. Whiteness is a constantly shifting boundary separating those who are entitled to have certain privileges from those whose exploitation and vulnerability to violence is justified by their not being white (Kivel, 1996, p. 19).
Whiteness,' like colour' and Blackness,' are essentially social constructs applied to human beings rather than veritable truths that have universal validity. The power of Whiteness, however, is manifested by the ways in which racialized Whiteness becomes transformed into social, political, economic, and cultural behaviour. White culture, norms, and values in all these areas become normative natural. They become the standard against which all other cultures, groups, and individuals are measured and usually found to be inferior (Henry & Tator, 2006, pp. 46-67).
Drawing on the important work of Ruth Frankenberg (1993), the authors of Teach Me to Thunder: A Manual for Anti-Racism Trainers, write that whiteness is
a dominant cultural space with enormous political significance, with the purpose to keep others on the margin....white people are not required to explain to others how white' culture works, because white' culture is the dominant culture that sets the norms. Everybody else is then compared to that norm....In times of perceived threat, the normative group may well attempt to reassert its normativity by asserting elements of its cultural practice more explicitly and exclusively. (21)
An example of this normative whiteness was the furor concerning Baltej Singh Dhillon's fight to wear a turban, for religious reasons, as part of his RCMP uniform. The argument that the Mountie uniform was a tradition' that should not be changed belied white Canadians' perceptions of Sikh people and communities of colour as threatening' their position of privilege in Canada.
Key Features of Whiteness
Whiteness is multidimensional, complex, systemic and systematic:
It is socially and politically constructed, and therefore a learned behavior
It does not just refer to skin colour but is ideology based on beliefs, values behaviors, habits and attitudes, which result in the unequal distribution of power and privilege based on skin colour (Frye, 1983; Kivel, 1996)
It represents a position of power where the power holder defines the categories, which means that the power holder decides who is white and who is not (Frye, 1983)
It is relational. "White" only exists in relation/opposition to other categories/locations in the racial hierarchy produced by whiteness. In defining others,' whiteness defines itself.
It is fluid - who is considered white changes over time (Kivel, 1996)
It is a state of unconsciousness: whiteness is often invisible to white people, and this perpetuates a lack of knowledge or understanding of difference which is a root cause of oppression (hooks, 1994)
It shapes how white people view themselves and others, and places white people in a place of structural advantage where white cultural norms and practices go unnamed and unquestioned (Frankenberg, 1993). Cultural racism is founded in the belief that "whiteness is considered to be the universal . . . and allows one to think and speak as if Whiteness described and defined the world." (Henry & Tator, 2006, p. 327)
White versus Whiteness
race is scientifically insignificant.
race is a socially constructed category that powerfully attaches meaning to perceptions of skin colour; inequitable social/economic relations are structured and reproduced (including the meanings attached to skin colour...) through notions of race, class, gender, and nation.
whiteness is a set of normative privileges granted to white-skinned individuals and groups; it is normalized in its production/maintenance for those of that group such that its operations are invisible' to those privileged by it (but not to those oppressed/disadvantaged by it); it has a long history in European imperialism and epistemologies (for those who are of mixed ancestry and pass' as white, this normativity, I would assume, would not occur).
distinct but not separate from ideologies and material manifestations of ideologies of class, nation, gender, sexuality, and ability.
the meaning of whiteness' is historical and has shifted over time (ie Irish, southern European peoples-Italian, Spanish, Greek; have at times been raced' as non-white).
http://www.ucalgary.ca/cared/racialization
sheshe2
(86,868 posts)WhiskeyGrinder
(23,623 posts)thought process.'
If only there was universal scorn and derision for any slurs. But there aren't. We know what happens when we "switch white to anything else." We end up with white hegemony. If racism really were limited only to slurs, "wypipo" would indeed be as hurtful as the n-word or any other racial slur. But under white hegemony, terms used by racial minorities to mock white people cannot reduce the privilege white people have as white people.
Is it a race-based slur? Sure. Does it carry the same power as slurs white people use against POC? Nope. I mean sure, white people can be butthurt about it. Nothing stopping them. But really, all that slur will do is make them butthurt. It's not a tool to keep them oppressed the way slurs against POC are.
Devil Child
(2,728 posts)Is it a race-based slur? Sure. Does it carry the same power as slurs white people use against POC? Nope. I mean sure, white people can be butthurt about it. Nothing stopping them. But really, all that slur will do is make them butthurt. It's not a tool to keep them oppressed the way slurs against POC are.
No disagreement with this and not arguing equivalency. I wouldn't take the stand that wypipo has the same history and use as a tool of oppression as the N-word brings. Just in disagreement with the mindset of the linked article that some slurs are acceptable or able to be rationalized.
WhiskeyGrinder
(23,623 posts)Yeah, so it's not clear to me; are you saying it's unacceptable for an oppressed population to use mocking terms against its oppressor?
Devil Child
(2,728 posts)Yeah, so it's not clear to me; are you saying it's unacceptable for an oppressed population to use mocking terms against its oppressor?
Well you are phrasing the question in highly specific terms so I will respond in kind. I am in disagreement with the appropriateness of the use of racial slurs and embracing of negative racial stereotypes. That is all.
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)including history, societal dynamics, numbers, equity gaps, who is in control and who is doing the oppressing.
But in isolation, trying to impose the shoe on the other foot test to argue that a word is somehow unfair to the majority in the same way a pejorative negatively impacts an oppressed minority, is just an excuse for a non-oppressed majority to control.
WhiskeyGrinder
(23,623 posts)jrthin
(4,925 posts)Eliot Rosewater
(32,403 posts)because the first non POC lynched, the first non POC (i cant use that W word, too risky) gunned down for walking down a street (Trayvon Martin) doing nothing, the first non POC choked to death for selling a cigarette (Eric Garner), the first non POC killed for jaywalking (Michael Brown) or killed for listening to loud music (Jordan Davis), the entire nation would be on fire.
Speech would be on the back burner, while we would be putting out actual fires everywhere.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)to "non POC" in significantly greater absolute numbers. POC are only 13% of the population, whites over 77%.
For sure POC are several times more likely to be victimized for the crime of being wherever at the wrong time than whites, and surely that truth is more than enough to be outraged about?
The teeth-gnashing over this term is odd.
Nevernose
(13,081 posts)Between:
Even though Im white, the term wypipo is harmless, funny, and doesnt faze me in he least.
The term wypipo is a racist pejorative and hypocritical, unintentional or otherwise
and
Black people say the N-word, so why cant i?
Because Im guessing that theres a much higher crossover between certain combinations.
wonkwest
(463 posts)And believe that racial pejoratives directed at other groups have no place in our society, period.
People can say what they want about themselves within their own group. As a gay man, I hear plenty of "f----t" or homo from other gay men (ever listen to drag queens for about five minutes? They have all the best words that are inwardly directed and recognized in the community).
And that's fine. But, imagine if a straight person started using those words towards gay people? Wouldn't go over so well. So it is that white people - or any non-black ethnicity - shouldn't be using black-based pejoratives towards that community.
Denigrating white people by non-white groups with racial pejoratives shouldn't be ok in civil discourse. But, if you want to be nasty, by all means, be nasty. Just don't be shocked if someone points out you're being nasty.
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)and understand that a minority using certain terms as a means of release and comedy is significantly different than a majority's use of perjoratives that they are in a position to inject and internalize into the culture and governance in a way that negatively impacts the lives of the people they're discussing - and they don't try to equate the two and pretend that they suffer victimization equivalent to the minority's.
True liberals wouldn't even embarrass themselves by saying such a thing because they know it's ridiculous.
Docreed2003
(17,631 posts)Clearly from this thread!!! (Here's where I should put the sarcasm emoji but I'm not...lol)
wonkwest
(463 posts)I really do. Effie, I like you. I like how you highlight things I may not have otherwise seen. One of the best parts of your presence here is how you are always providing a window into the black experience that white people may be clueless about. When I see your OPs, I listen, and oftentimes I learn.
This? It's just people being alienating jerks. It may feel good, but it doesn't help us. Talking shit about white people may be a release, but in the non-message board world, we need to win elections to effect real change and real social justice.
This stuff doesn't help at all. Republicans can pick this up and go, "See, Democrats hate you."
No no no.
White people need to be allies in social justice if we're to go where we need to be. This stuff makes allies of no one. That's my real, practical objection.
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)they weren't allies in the first place.
Fighting for civil rights is not some gift that white people bestow upon us conditionally, as long as we behave as they want us to - and the minute one or even a few of us say something they don't like or say something in a way they find objectionable, they pack up and leave.
That's not how it works. White allies aren't doing us a favor by being our allies and if they are truly allies, they don't get offended and storm out over picayune shit like black people making jokes about "Wypipo."
That said, I appreciate the compliment and am glad you find meaning in my posts.
wonkwest
(463 posts)(I'm going to reference my own status a lot in getting my point across)
No one is going to suddenly be racist because Wypipo. But it will reinforce a predilection. If a white person is coming around, making steps, trying to be a better person, and then they see, "We just hate white people," it's very counterproductive. It turns future allies off.
My family is uber Catholic. I came out, I wrestled with them. Today, everything is fine. My parents are like, "Are you bringing your boyfriend with you?" in a positive way when I travel to see them.
What I don't do is make fun of them for being Catholic. I don't denigrate them. I don't tell them how wrong they are. I tell them, "This is who I am, this is my life, and this is my happiness." That's a much smoother road.
Wypipo is adversarial. If you want a fight, you'll get a fight. I just don't want a fight. There are better ways. That's where I'm coming from.
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)sensibilities of potential former racists.
Funny how when white people offend US - whether by calling the cops on us, voting for racists, arresting and killing us or something else, we're not supposed to make too big a deal about it because we might offend white folk and that would of course, be "divisive." But if white folk are offended by something one of us says, they not only have full right to express it, but they that's an excuse for them to revert to racism.
Maybe instead of lecturing us about how we should speak, behave and protest, our white allies can take on the responsibility of working with their brethren to get over themselves and to stop being racists whether or not some random black person hurt their feelings.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)I will fight you anytime, metaphorically, about how much your response REFLECTS uber white privilege and entitlement that so many wypipo in society and here enjoy. Bring it on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
kcr
(15,510 posts)Easiest diagram in the world.
What is Blapipo? Blapipo is an alternative, partly phonetic spelling of the words Black People.
Do tell. How so? Well, first of all, Blapipo say shit like do tell, whereas there are a number of black people who would never utter that phrase. To understand fully, you must come to terms with one fact:
Not all black people are blapipo.
Anybody comfortable with this?
George II
(67,782 posts)TCJ70
(4,387 posts)Does it matter? Since apparently pejoratives against subsets of people are ok maybe Ill start using it.
pejorative. It's white people. Is the term white people pejorative? Go ahead I want to see YOUR pejoratives. Can't wait.
TCJ70
(4,387 posts)...not something I'd like to condone. Think about it the opposite way. If someone took "black people" and shortened it to blapipo and assigned negative things to it's meaning, it'd be outright deemed unacceptable as it should be.
WhiskeyGrinder
(23,623 posts)No, but mainly because your post doesn't make sense. White people don't say "blapipo" to oppress and hurt black people. They say the n-word. POC don't say "wypipo" to oppress and hurt white people. "Wypipo" doesn't hold the institutional power that the n-word as well as the concept itself hold.
TCJ70
(4,387 posts)To belittle and hurt? Any pejorative term used against a subset of people is wrong as far as Im concerned. If equality is the goal, it has to be. No matter what power anyone has.
WhiskeyGrinder
(23,623 posts)To give us a bigger vocabulary to talk about white supremacy. White supremacy is not just the southern sheriff and dogs and hoses and segregated schools and redlining. It's the nice, concerned, upstanding and sometimes even liberal everyday people who benefit from white hegemony and aren't comfortable talking about dismantling it because they're afraid of what they might lose. As always, if it doesn't apply to you, it doesn't apply to you.
The languages of the oppressed -- slang, codes, argots, etc. -- are a valuable tool for helping them manage life under oppression, as well as to help them overcome it. Describing a hegemony as a "subset" is a little disingenuous, really.
If you think using the term "wypipo" is on par with the n-word, equality is not your goal.
TCJ70
(4,387 posts)Your entire first paragraph. Bullshit. Look at what the author says about the term itself. Apparently dancing in the wrong place earns you this title.
But you said the term isnt meant to describe an entire group. Or is it? Just more bullshit.
Anyone who uses either term against another is an asshole as far as Im concerned.
BumRushDaShow
(140,481 posts)Are you aware that black people use the term "negro" as an adjective vs a noun (including in terms such as "HNIC" which is descriptive)?
You want to see "wypipo" as a literal collective noun whereas it's a slang adjective for a specific "type" of behavior by some whites. Just like "negro" being used to describe a specific "type" behavior used by some blacks.
So you could theoretically say "He is acting like a wypipo (white) person" but the slang version drops the "white person" adjective/noun that is being modified by "wypipo" as an adverb by saying - "He is acting like a wypipo" (or drop the article "a" to make it "He is acting wypipo" ).
The point of doing this is to actually remove the "broad-brush" and focus on the behavior that runs counter to any type of societal common sense. I.e., their having a complete disconnect about why acting the way they do can cause harm. In some cases, you may see hyperbole used to underscore the depth of the disconnect.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)wypipo are white people. Period.
TCJ70
(4,387 posts)Do you know what the term means?
self-explanatory after I got what it means. Mr. Harriot DID NOT call wypipo anything they are not. Wypipo are white people. What's the problem? In your experience what does wypipo mean to you? You feel like someone called you a n****r or something derogatory? What?
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)muriel_volestrangler
(102,309 posts)If this is something that doesn't apply to some who would fall under the term "white people", then when you use it, you're going to have to explain why it's about specific behaviours, and not about what it appears to be. Which makes it fairly useless as a word so far, if it has to be followed with a far longer definition.
On DU, I can find 2 examples of DUers using it themselves, in all of DU's existence. And 3 examples of people linking to Michael Harriot using it, which were all in the past 2 days (and one of which is this explanation).
heaven05
(18,124 posts)Last edited Wed May 9, 2018, 08:50 AM - Edit history (1)
used by MANY in society who are talking about wypipo. I don't see the problem, as many here may not see a problem in using the descriptive word defining a race of people as n****rs.
phylny
(8,540 posts)heaven05
(18,124 posts)Igel
(35,993 posts)But a lot of whites use "black people" because it's a neutral replacement for the n-word that they can still hang their prejudice on.
If you listen to the words, it's not hateful. If you listen to the content--just a little less superficially--it still is.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)as wypipo are ALL white people. Period. What's your point? Doesn't offend me. Now I'll tell you the word that does offend me, oh you know it already. I won't belabour the point.
Bucky
(55,334 posts)or maybe "pipoacula"
"pipoacula". What is that. It took me a minute to understand the term wypipo. Am I slow on the uptake sometimes?...sigh yes
Just for you
"pipo a cula"
(people of color)
heaven05
(18,124 posts)nini
(16,690 posts)Loved the last part:
But if you stop crying for a few seconds, and listen to the universe, you just might be able to hear the worlds tiniest man playing an even-tinier piano. He is strumming a sad song, collectively written by the ancestors of slaves, the descendants of Jim Crows strange fruit and the marginalized people all across America. Its low-volume wail reflects the buckets of white tears and caucasian pain felt by the aggrieved souls of whiteness everywhere.
It is officially entitled Blues For Butthurt White Snowflakes in the Age of Resistance
We call it Wypipo music.
Unfortunately I know a lot of people that term applies to.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Considering what he has said about Bill and Hillary Clinton.
betsuni
(27,254 posts)Omygerd:
Should be a no-brainer.
And where are the Clinton "purity" police when we need them? Oh, wait...
Deflection usually means someone hit the target.
betsuni
(27,254 posts)The status quo oligarch establishment Wall Street warmonger neoliberal corporatist stuff: GONE!
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)muriel_volestrangler
(102,309 posts)And writing articles why that was the right thing to do?
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)I don't agree with what a lot of people think about the Clinton's but that doesn't make everything else they say or write is irrelevant or unworthy.
I'm far too intelligent to think like that.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)how many here were OK with not voting for HRC because their emotions were wrapped up in another primary election candidate LOSER. Free speech is why it was okay for the backers of a primary election candidate LOSER to not say nice things about HRC and he wasn't/isn't a Democrat? Harriot has free speech rights and while I do not agree with him, have fought and will defend his right to say what he pleases about any candidate running for office. All this is distraction and diversion from his wypipo colloquialism. Lots of poor people got their fe fe's hurt. Their entitlement and privilege do not allow any brown person to find non pejorative words as used by many, many people BEFORE Harriot wrote his piece. And still is. I know damn well it's part of my personal dictionary now and forever.
muriel_volestrangler
(102,309 posts)Sure, he can say what he wants. But since this word was mainly brought to DU by people quoting this idiot, it's fair to ask if it is, in fact, an idiotic word that makes things worse. The acrimony on DU indicates it does make things worse.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)will get rid of the stink of hypocrisy that is heavy in the air because of people NOT wanting wypipo to describe their existence. It's all about a one-word description of members of one race that raises the hackles of the entitled and privileged here. Nothing more, nothing less.
So maybe it will have the opposite effect to your analysis of things getting worse because of the term wypipo. I hope the word helps disperse the stink of hypocrisy evident in a lot of responses here about the colloquialism wypipo vs what AA have been derogatorily called for generations. Racism in ameriKKKa will never end. Too many generations have perpetuated a hate based on skin colour. If wypipo hate the description wypipo, a non pejorative description, unlike the pejoratives, used to describe black people. No sweat. I feel it is because of some who hate to look in the mirror at themselves, catch a glimpse and don't like what they see.
muriel_volestrangler
(102,309 posts)It explains, at some length, what is wrong with the people he calls "wypipo", and criticizes, for instance, Whoopi Goldberg for often siding with them.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)it still doesn't take away from the FACT, wypipo means white people. I don't care what he put the term with as far as the conduct of white people is concerned. Whether wypipo or white people, you still can be called to account for the continuing racism, mistrust and evil deeds, historically and today as written by Mr. Harriot. Sick of the whining about WYPIPO. The term wypipo is not pejorative in its base meaning. I don't care what was attached to the word wypipo. Wypipo have been attaching much evil to the words, black people for generations. Yet the term black people is not pejorative in its descriptive meaning. I prefer the term person of color or specifically when warranted, African-american. I am done with this pity party.
sheshe2
(86,868 posts)Response to oberliner (Reply #48)
muriel_volestrangler This message was self-deleted by its author.
lapucelle
(19,518 posts)"On Language" pretty much every Sunday while he was writing, despite his right wing Republican politics and his virulent and irrational Clinton hatred, and as a graduate student was able to appreciate the Grimm brothers' ground breaking work in linguistics without reference to the more troubling aspects of their unrelated hobby of writing tales for children.
It might help if people were better able to make distinctions between a commentator's pursuit of semiotic inquiry and understanding and his political perspective on one particular figure. It's an intellectual version of being able to walk and chew gum at the same time. (See also ignoratio elenchi)
George II
(67,782 posts)He had a brilliant grasp of the English Language, and I learned quite a bit just from reading.
Did you know he was the person who coined Spiro Agnew's phrase "Nattering Nabob of Negativism"?
lapucelle
(19,518 posts)Was he Agnew's speechwriter?
George II
(67,782 posts)...republican, and I disagreed with him on many of the things he said, his demeanor made you like him anyway.
He wasn't a 21st Century conservative republican. He wasn't belligerent and abusive, he was respectful.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)It just seems like there is some inconsistency at times regarding those who will dismiss an OP because the author has conservative leanings but then say the other views of a different author don't matter if they agree with the content.
lapucelle
(19,518 posts)EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)different place.
Steven Maurer
(490 posts)He's just another extremist kook. Oh, and that "last real Negus" thing he puts as his tag line? If you're an educated black or wander through that community, they'll tell you just how eye-rollingly stupid it is. It's kind of like a guy claiming to be the "last real thane".
RhodeIslandOne
(5,042 posts)This guy isnt making fun of the Sarah Sanders evangelicals hillbillies or Wall Street Trumps. This is a square shot at limousine liberals and trust fund hippy college kids. Hence the shit about feeding dogs at the table and signs at Sea World. Its astounding this sort of anti-libtard tripe is allowed here, unless the proponents are generally ignorant at who this is aimed at.....
Never mind its inherent problematic tip of the hat to certain dialect which is most certainly not a shot at caucasians.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Yet somehow posting his crap here is all good.
Coventina
(27,792 posts)I love animals way more than people.
I always have, going back to my earliest memories, and I suspect I always will.
Yay animals!!!!
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)I must be a wipopo sigh. And I was completely unaware of it. Silly me.
hlthe2b
(105,817 posts)care for helpless animals-- as well as the young, the aged, the downtrodden-- are absolute markers for those who would act for meaningful change. Instead, caring for animals is demonized? Good gawd, talk about misguided, missed opportunities.
The author of that piece should show me exactly how being empathetic to animals somehow makes one LESS likely to care or act on human rights and equality issues for POC. It runs counter to even common sense, much less the historical record.
and seeing this kind of crap re-enforces why I love animals more than people! Here's to animals!
50 Shades Of Blue
(10,818 posts)oberliner
(58,724 posts)Absolute garbage from someone who explicitly does not support Democrats.
MrScorpio
(73,699 posts)March 18, 2015 by AlterNet
White fragility is a defensive response to real conversations about race.
By Sam Adler-Bell. This article originally appeared on Alternet.
Stop me if youve heard this one.
Last year, a white male Princeton undergraduate was asked by a classmate to check his privilege. Offended by this suggestion, he shot off a 1,300-word essay to the Tory, a right-wing campus newspaper.In it, he wrote about his grandfather who fled the Nazis to Siberia, his grandmother who survived a concentration camp in Germany, about the humble wicker basket business they started in America. He railed against his classmates for diminishing everything [hed] accomplished, all the hard work [hed] done.
His missive was reprinted by Time. He was interviewed by the New York Times and appeared on Fox News. He became a darling of white conservatives across the country.
What he did not do, at any point, was consider whether being white and male might have given him if not his ancestors some advantage in achieving incredible success in America. He did not, in other words, check his privilege.
To Robin DiAngelo, professor of multicutural education at Westfield State University and author of What Does it Mean to Be White? Developing White Racial Literacy, Tal Fortgangs essay indignant, defensive, beside-the-point, somehow both self-pitying and self-aggrandizing followed a familiar script. As an anti-racist educator for more than two decades, DiAngelo has heard versions of it recited hundreds of times by white men and women in her workshops.
https://goodmenproject.com/ethics-values/white-people-freak-theyre-called-race-hesaid/
oberliner
(58,724 posts)And the writer of: "Fuck Bill Clinton. I never voted for Bill Clinton. I never liked him."
Here's what the author of the OP wrote about Hillary during the campaign:
RhodeIslandOne
(5,042 posts)....and hes basically just that twat Ben Shapiro.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)But I agree that this writer is awful.
RhodeIslandOne
(5,042 posts)He likes to rail about organic food, social justice warriors and why Clinton was worse than Trump too.
sheshe2
(86,868 posts)I know someone that called for a sitting President who was adored by many Democrats, to be primaried.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Still infuriates me.
Anyone who did not vote for Hillary Clinton in the general election against Donald Trump deserves nothing but scorn.
lunatica
(53,410 posts)Good thread. Edifying on many levels and well worth reading. This is why I love DU!
raven mad
(4,940 posts)Make the interrogators look it up for themselves.
Nonetheless, as usual, you step up to bat and knock that sucker OUT of the park . 😁💐⚾
sheshe2
(86,868 posts)pansypoo53219
(21,632 posts)but i grew up on the edge. i miss integration.
betsuni
(27,254 posts)"That's the one thing you have to remember about WASPs: they love animals and hate people." He was talking about wypipo.
Good to see you, betsuni.
sheshe2
(86,868 posts)GeorgeGist
(25,399 posts)Tipperary
(6,930 posts)He hates Hillary specifically, Democrats in general. Ugly to see this posted here.
sheshe2
(86,868 posts)You researched him? Funny, I have posted many articles from him in the past here on DU. You only just noticed him?
SomethingNew
(279 posts)"Not all black people are n******."
One wonders why one version is rightfully considered horrid while the other is, apparently, fine.
Response to SomethingNew (Reply #60)
Duppers This message was self-deleted by its author.
TheSmarterDog
(794 posts)Basically, it's a reasonable person's reaction to being unreasonably oppressed. And, while it is a pejorative, unlike pejoratives historically used by Europeans against other races, no threats of violence are intended or implied.
If you see yourself as a "wypipo" and are offended, you might be part of the problem.
phylny
(8,540 posts)another group. That's my "problem."
If it makes others feel good to use derogatory labels, if it gives them pleasure or a feeling of power, that's THEIR problem.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)In comedy, "punching up" is funny while "punching down" is not.
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)I just did. He hates Hillary. He sounds like a nutcase. This is some ugly shit he is pushing.
betsuni
(27,254 posts)Tipperary
(6,930 posts)I doubt she would give a shit what this Herriot wrote.
sheshe2
(86,868 posts)Thanks though.
BannonsLiver
(17,649 posts)A bigot and a racist with a touch of misogyny for good measure.
Response to sheshe2 (Original post)
Post removed
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)We are ALL hard wired genetically to be suspicious of what is different, a survival trait. No human being is exempted, though we range from extremely mild to extremely strong.
I'm remembering a troop of Japanese Boy Scouts who screamed and ran away when they saw my blonde friend approaching on a forest trail. She had become so tired of Japanese racism by then that she wasn't amused telling me two years later.
The word "racist" is far too limited for this reaction of course. Used to be tattoos triggered the same "uh, oh, not from my tribe" reaction, and no doubt they will again some day in future when they've disappeared again from pop culture.
betsuni
(27,254 posts)Humans don't have instincts. If they had instincts to be suspicious of what is different, they wouldn't have evolved the way they did to have such different cultures, languages, food preferences, etc. Other animals don't.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)predispositions to various behaviors. Fascinating subject to read about, and there's plenty out there, more coming almost literally every day. The age of science continues, which is itself another major trigger for intense bias in those disposed to it, of course.
As for bias against those who are different ( "racism" form of bias) being a universal human characteristic, just take a thoughtful look at this "wypipo" example.
betsuni
(27,254 posts)What genetic predispositions to various behaviors?
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)and little talked about, but tell scientists that. That nonsense matters to them as it affects their funding.
A book I have on this and recommend is "Our Political Nature: The Evolutionary Origins of What Divides Us." A number of good ones apparently came out around the same (2013) and of course others after, and this is neither the first or last word. But it offers a survey of what had been learned on this topic from various scientific disciplines, including neuroscience and genetics, and from a global viewpoint while addressing American politics.
Publishing on this topic for lay readers has been somewhat quashed since then as conservatives tend not to like what they're reading, but any search on it (personality, genetics, political, etc.) will turn up some things. Including such quirky findings as a study that MRI scanning of the brain could predict political orientation 83% of the time. "Scans show that liberals and conservatives use different parts of the brain when they take risks, helping to pinpoint the political party a person prefers." https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/study-predicts-political-beliefs-with-83-percent-accuracy-17536124/ According to something else I read, a quick glance at the MRI scans of a fair number of people can be as accurate, like looking at a pitcher's arms and knowing if he's a right or left thrower. It's because we tend to process information in different orders and exercise different parts of the brain a bit more.
Have fun. And for all the general conservative reaction to it, learning how and why we naturally hold the beliefs we do helps generate respect and empathy also.
betsuni
(27,254 posts)Human brains are extremely flexible. Otherwise, a baby born in China adopted by an American couldn't grown up to speak English and be a capitalist who loves cheeseburgers.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Mosby
(17,249 posts)Bradshaw3
(7,947 posts)Just like the creationists and people who yell "fake news". Sorry I'll take credible science over people who think their opinions are more valuable than fact and reason.
betsuni
(27,254 posts)Bradshaw3
(7,947 posts)muriel_volestrangler
(102,309 posts)of other groups. They show how partial isolation, which can end up with diverging cultures, wasn't easily erased by mixing and recombining when the groups re-met - because they were suspicious of the other groups.
Other animals don't have culture of language in the same way we do.
Of course humans have instincts. And these can shape our social behaviour.
betsuni
(27,254 posts)muriel_volestrangler
(102,309 posts)betsuni
(27,254 posts)Ever hear of it?
Coventina
(27,792 posts)sexual preference at all, fear would not exist, I could go on and on.
Yes, humans have instincts. We are animals, just like the rest of the tree of life on earth.
Anthropology.
Biology
Culture.
Science.
betsuni
(27,254 posts)Humans learn almost everything from their culture, from how they raise babies to what they think is sexy to how they bury their dead. duh.
Coventina
(27,792 posts)But I guess my question to you would be: why do you think we're magically different from other animals?
betsuni
(27,254 posts)This is why we're communicating on a computer and dogs are still barking. Opposable thumbs.
Coventina
(27,792 posts)The only reason we survive as a species is because of our instincts.
Otherwise we would abandon our babies, be disinterested in sex, and would never have invented the computer.
betsuni
(27,254 posts)non-instinct-driven brains. Hello, anthropology. Read some.
Coventina
(27,792 posts)betsuni
(27,254 posts)A lot of animals can't.
Coventina
(27,792 posts)who says that humans do not have instincts.
I am anxious to read that.
muriel_volestrangler
(102,309 posts)so I've no idea why you think its existence would show anything. Of course we have instincts, just like other animals. Why would you think that humans would be the exception?
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)which helps create the kind of strong connections that helped communities survive in the all the tens of thousands of years many failed to.
Interestingly, science has discovered that animals will protect first-degree blood relatives at the expense of even second-degree, and second-degree at the expense of third-degree, and these patterns of protecting the genetic codes we pass down are discovered in human families as well.
And now I understand better why our friend Karen, married for 50 years into a large, very cohesive family around which their lives revolve, is right when she said, theoretically, that if she divorced she would immediately be cast out. She has a lot of old, old friends in that family, and children, but it's so cohesive because they feel that blood connection more strongly than most. Obviously there are very strong environmental factors here, but now we know genetic dispositions and reinforcements will be involved to varying degrees as well.
betsuni
(27,254 posts)that sort of thing doesn't happen much anymore since schools stopped teaching children to be afraid of foreigners. Look up "Nihonjinron."
What are you even talking about?
Chemisse
(30,983 posts)We really needed a word to describe those who let their dogs lick their faces, but only white people. Really how despicable.
Of course we already have words for people who don't care about black issues or equality, who have zero empathy for the killings of unarmed blacks. Racist, bigoted, prejudiced. And they are fair words; they apply to any person who harbors such animosity toward others. Still, they are most often attributed to whites in a white-dominated culture, such as in the U.S.
But now we just MUST have a word that describes those white people who are racist AND kiss their kitties. How could our vocabulary ever be complete without it?
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)"Of course we already have words for people who don't care about black issues or equality, who have zero empathy for the killings of unarmed blacks. Racist, bigoted, prejudiced. And they are fair words; they apply to any person who harbors such animosity toward others."
There are plenty of white folk who think they're liberal, open-minded, fair people who don't care about black issues or equality, who have zero empathy for the killings of unarmed blacks. And they scream bloody murder - and so do their apologists - at the very suggestion they may be racist, bigoted or prejudiced. And the minute they think anyone is calling them that, they throw a fit and try to shut down the conversation.
And in fact, one doesn't have to be a racist or a bigot to turn a deaf ear to equality or brutality. It happens all the time - we see it right here on DU every day:
"I'm not racist! I know that racism exists and is a problem. But racism isn't occurring THIS time and it's wrong for people to say it is. It's not fair to the person being accused and it only makes it harder to fight racism when it REALLY happens!"
"You can't say this was racist. You don't know all the facts."
"You can't say this was racist because you don't know what's in her heart."
"I know the video looks bad, but we don't know what happened before so you can't really say it was racist."
"It's a shame the cop shot him, but he should have obeyed instructions ... or shouldn't have run away ... or shouldn't have mouthed off ... or shouldn't have been holding that cellphone (or wallet or Skittles) ... or shouldn't have been acting so suspiciously in his own backyard ..."
"We don't know the whole story so we shouldn't jump to conclusions and accuse her of being a racist."
And so on and so on and so on...
Oh, and talking about race, racism and racial dynamics doesn't "fuel up racism."
betsuni
(27,254 posts)I don't even know what the hell it means.
Chemisse
(30,983 posts)There are plenty of people who are white who are not actively racist, but don't seem to care about the injustices done to POCs. It's helpful to illuminate that.
My problem is that by calling people out as racist, or even with a special new insulting term, does indeed 'fuel up racism.' It makes people angry and defensive and can lead to polarization, which is the last thing we need.
I think most white people here on DU (including myself) are not racist in any intentional way, but we have different realities. The police killings of unarmed black men and boys over the past 5 or 8 years or so really stunned me. And yet it quickly became clear to me that it's always been that way - and worse - I just didn't know about it. I suspect there is a whole lot more that I don't understand - yet.
It's difficult to step out of one's own viewpoint, which is mostly a result of all the experiences you've had in life, to see another way of looking at things, which was the result of an entirely different set of experiences. I think most of the comments you see as racist here on DU are a result of this.
We need illumination, not condemnation.
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)If someone claims they have become racist because someone referred to white people as "wypipo," they're lying to you. People are racist because they're racists, not because of something someone wrote on DU.
cwydro
(51,308 posts)This silly word about which certain DUers felt the need to illuminate us - is beyond stupid, seemingly semi-literate, and yes, obviously posted to divide.
Never heard of Herriot until today. Wonder if he works for Putin.
Hes doing a splendid job, you know, encouraging everyone not to vote and all.
Docreed2003
(17,631 posts)hatrack
(60,565 posts)Mesmerizing!
Docreed2003
(17,631 posts)OneGrassRoot
(23,386 posts)Last edited Sat May 5, 2018, 01:59 PM - Edit history (1)
This thread, like many on DU, express the discomfort of so many white people.
They compare their discomfort to the legit danger POC experience every single day.
Referring to a certain group of white people as wypipo isn't REMOTELY similar to racial slurs. I don't see it as much different from hipsters (who pretty much tend to be white) or other labels, which can have a snarky intent behind them...yet, interestingly, the people who identify with that label usually aren't offended by it.
The same can't be said of the targets of racial slurs.
White people feel discomfort (like that white woman at the Colorado university who called the cops on two Native American young men); POC are often put in grave danger due to white people's discomfort.
Huge difference and I wish white people at DU -- the ones who are genuine and not here simply to stir shit -- would step back to recognize that difference and put these discussions into perspective.
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)Boomer
(4,241 posts)So many White people go ballistic when they're made uncomfortable about race because it's a new sensation. It seems to overwhelm their sense of perspective, so they don't stop to realize that their discomfort is momentary, has no substantive impact on their lives, and they can walk away from it any time they want.
Black people don't have that choice.
And that's part of the point. Wypipo. Get over yourselves.
caraher
(6,307 posts)I'd never heard the term before I noticed this and another thread yesterday. The amount of defensiveness over its existence and usage is not surprising given the nature of racial privilege, which of course includes not having one's racial identity come to the fore in daily life.
Can someone bigoted against white people use wypipo in hateful ways? Sure. Does its use play off stereotypes? You bet. It's irreverent and as far as I can see also generally just used in ways that are funny (with an edge, to be sure).
Like it or not (and I hope the answer is "not!" ), we're living in a nation and age where racial animus has become central to our political discourse. This mostly strikes me as a harmless way of dealing with 24/7 racial tension with some edgy humor. I'm sure a lot of us need that opportunity.
And yeah, I'm white.
MineralMan
(147,290 posts)In another thread, I told someone who didn't understand to read it out loud. It's a phonetic equivalent that illustrates how poorly we speak our own language. It's equivalent to "presnitedstates," which is a phonetic transcription of how almost everyone says "President of the United States."
In itself, wypipo really carries no particular meaning. It is just how many people pronounce "white people." And, indeed, it is white people who are the ones treating people of color like second-class citizens. Not all white people, of course. But the ones doing that are almost universally wypipo.
Those of us with privilege need to pay closer attention to our privilege. We didn't earn white privilege. We did nothing to deserve it. It's just something we happened to be born with. It entitles us to nothing.
muriel_volestrangler
(102,309 posts)The article is very specific that it's not 'just how many people pronounce "white people."'. And it seems far from 'self-explanatory'.
BumRushDaShow
(140,481 posts)he is invoking the term in the essay to make this point (from the OP article) -
So when you are unfairly (or even fairly) associated with anything negative, it is offensive because you live with the privilege of existing as an individual. You are not used to being reduced to a stereotype or trope.
Its as reductive and demeaning as being referred to as inner city, urban or underprivileged. Thats what the term wypipo does. It is a tiny, microscopic taste of wypipos own medicine, and I understand why they find that little spoonful bitter. It is infuriating to be cataloged into a cliché that paints you with such broad strokes.
So in a way, it is "meaningless" (or perhaps "valueless" in terms of it being a "fiat" or "token" term that can be assigned whatever the user chooses within the scope of racial discussion. I noted in another post that it is apparently used more like an adjective or adverb than a noun but it does open up a discussion on why it is used and what might trigger its usage.
B2G
(9,766 posts)that it's hilarious. No wonder it was published under the Humor section. Lol.
◾White people dont season their food, but wypipo like theirs organic, free range and gluten free.
◾Wypipo are deathly worried about radical Islamic terroristm, but wont acknowledge that the vast majority of terrorism in America comes from white people.
◾White people cant dance, but wypipo love to dance and will dance anywhere.
◾Wypipo are pro-life when it comes to abortion, but cool with the death penalty and police brutality. Those wypipo will tell you that pro-life is just a term to describe the anti-abortion movement, that it has nothing to do with issues of police violence and capital punishment. But if you mention the movement that focuses on State violence against black bodies, they will quickly say, but what about black on black crime?
◾Wypipo have the intestinal fortitude to wear shorts and flip flops all year round. When it is absolutely too cold to wear them, yoga pants will suffice.
◾There are some white people who believe in social justice causes, but wypipo need special names for themselves, like allies or social justice warriors.
◾There are white people who treat human beings like human beings and dont need special recognition for it. Wypipo will point out their safety pins and wear Black Lives Matter t-shirts.
◾Wypipo believe kneeling during the national anthem is unpatriotic and disrespectful to the men and women who lost their lives defending this country. Yet they are cool with the Confederate flag, which actually represents an act of treason that killed almost as many Americans as all the other wars combined.
◾White people have all kinds of friends and associates. Wypipo know exactly how many black friends they have and can remember that one time in 1998 they spent an entire day with their Dominican co-worker.
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)Bok_Tukalo
(4,397 posts)<OPE>
B2G
(9,766 posts)Gluten free, organic eating, dancing, animal loving, flip flop wearing pro lifers, who get offended when people kneel for the National Anthem and are afraid of Muslims, yet call themselves 'allies' and 'SJWs' who wear Black Lives Matter t-shirts adorned with safety pins.
Did I miss anything?
What the ever-loving fuck?
BumRushDaShow
(140,481 posts)and that is not what the author is doing.
The descriptions are attempting to establish instances where certain behaviors and practices by certain individuals that are "x", should result in a "y" response to situations that would be analogous or inline with what "x"es normally would do, but don't, and they end up being a contradictory "z" instead, thus highlighting a hypocritical point of view. I.e., they are not "genuine". And in this case, they spend more time advertising how "x" they are ("externally" ) vs just being "x" and moving on.
The examples attempt to literally cut across all political persuasions and even races, and is very much done tongue firmly planted in cheek. And remember, these are sociological "concepts" and different cultures describe/express/label them in different ways.
Kirk Lover
(3,608 posts)I will not look at anything to do with this again.
Bok_Tukalo
(4,397 posts)Those engaged in malicious ridicule and/or rationalization of its use seem to agree it is a racial pejorative. They are not refuting the argument that wypipo is a slur.
spooky3
(35,867 posts)Because they deserve it!!!
ismnotwasm
(42,417 posts)Whether it was words or porn or rape culture or gamergate etc..wed have certain people show up, kind of pro and con folk, on-line enemiesalthough many of the Cons were MRAs and are no longer here, being banned for other reasons and some said fuck it went elsewhere and many of the active feminists said fuck it and went elsewhere, with a few being banned for strident arguing.
Particular topics with particular people showing up.
DU has never had a large population of PoC, but its even smaller now. Many of threads involving race and words here, are mostly groups of white people navel gazing.
I am seeing the same pattern though. In my opinion, the majority of white people not only dont understand racism from the perspective of being a victim of a Dominant power paradigm based on the lack of melanin, they far too often actively hide from trying to understand it.
Particular people showing up on particular topics. Interesting.
procon
(15,805 posts)Swap the words 'white' and 'black' and it's still just another weak attempt to hide the fear and hate of 'other' people behind a lot of disingenuous labeling rhetoric. Is 'wypipo' any less insulting than the names that are flung at black people for the same reason?
People are very complex individuals and we cannot be so easily pigeonholed by this divisive word or divided into racial categories by someone who believes all white folks exist as monolithic cartoon villains.
Regardless of what colors we come in, as human beings we empathize with people who are disadvantaged and treated unfairly. There is no color designations in who loves their pets and feels dismayed by both animal cruelty and human savagery, because we are all capable of multitasking skills.
We all support activism to raise awareness, we vote for politicians who will try to find solutions and advance the universal cause celebre of equality and justice. We try, black and white folks, we try. Stop trying to drive the dividing wedge of segregation and discrimination in deeper, we already have enough of that coming from Republicans.
Are you one of the color blind folks?
procon
(15,805 posts)We -- most of us, anyway -- work for years to teach our children that it's wrong to call people names, that they should not act like a bully and insult others. We try to make them better people who will grow up to be kind and aware, and not rush to judge others just for whatever colors they come in. We tell our kids not to pigeonhole whole groups of people by race, creed or gender, and to see their shared humanity instead. We train them not to stigmatise anyone with a demeaning label that is based on subjective racial stereotyping because that's hurtful and unnecessary, and it reflects poorly on their own ethical characters.
Clearly something as gone amiss if you aren't there yet.
ismnotwasm
(42,417 posts)I asked a question.
IluvPitties
(3,181 posts)Skidmore
(37,364 posts)Disappointing that so many are invested in not recognizing the truth in it and owning the full power of white privilege, which gives control over language and symbols. The author's point that only some have permission to create and use labels strikes at the very heart of racism. Tut-tutting still avoids facing and resolving that bullet list he provided as a map.
lark
(23,994 posts)Wypipo don't all like animals, that's just untrue. drumpf hates them since he doesn't want to fuck them and they don't make money for him. I also don't see KKKers being kind to any living thing. Also, lots of left wingers love animals and people of other ethnicities. Yes, there are way too many white people who are ok with cops killing innocent brown people, but this has nothing at all to do with how they are with animals. I really don't like that term, why not just use the one that fits - racists? That's the real problem.
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)And Wypipo and racists aren't synonymous.
Gothmog
(153,669 posts)elocs
(23,032 posts)so we can get all worked up and pissed about. If these people won't wear uniforms then we need labels.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Sending thoughts and prayers.
GaryCnf
(1,399 posts)I feel a little like I am reading this somewhere in an alternate universe.
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)are also the same ones who jump in to threads about racism to tell black people why we're wrong and overreacting when we we object to something we see as racist and whitesplain to us how we are "being divisive" by being so sensitive and accusatory.
Interesting how, for some people, being offended and divisiveness are one way streets. But at least I now know that they actually DO believe that racism exists - it's just that it doesn't seem to be a thing unless they think THEY'RE a victim of it.
We are supposed to let everything slide and sit back and wait. Nobody ever means anything and we shouldn't take anything anybody says because of reasons. Words never hurt anybody is what I always hear and these same people are probably up in here trolling about wypipo.
We have had to live with open code words like "thug" for how long now? Long enough that it is ingrained in the public conscious as almost singularly attached to us. For every person that gets upset about wypipo. There probably isn't one that has any real problems with they fact "thug" has been gifted to us as a "civilized" way of saying the n word in polite company.
I haven't read all through the numerous threads yet but I'm fully expecting the what if I said the n-word how would you feel argument from at least one wypipo, I mean it is a very wypipo thing to do.
XRubicon
(2,241 posts)based on internet postings. Keep up the good work!
Iggo
(48,195 posts)XRubicon
(2,241 posts)Iggo
(48,195 posts)sheshe2
(86,868 posts)are also the same ones who jump in to threads about racism to tell black people why we're wrong and overreacting when we we object to something we see as racist and whitesplain to us how we are "being divisive" by being so sensitive and accusatory.
Love all your posts and the patience you show in your detailed explanations and memories of your own past experiences. Thanks for taking the time to help us all to a clearer understanding. Your work is cut out for you, yet you are up for the task.
Teach.
Thank you.
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)betsuni
(27,254 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Goonch
(3,803 posts)Generic Other
(28,999 posts)The article should be quoted verbatim in every lexicon of slang terms.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)heaven05
(18,124 posts)are a hoot. Got all the wypipo pissed at being called white people by a black person. Woke? Generations have passed since the end of slavery, 66million+ people are still asleep. The whiners here are still asleep. The tears shed here over that mean black man categorizing white people as wypipo has filled many pools. I'm laughing at the revelations laid out here as to real motivations concerning racism and why it persists. I laugh at the tears shed.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Along with: "Fuck Bill Clinton. I never voted for Bill Clinton. I never liked him."
And also: "The Democratic Party Is Not Our Friend"
Amazing how well-liked he seems to be at DU.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)just like some trumpdumps regretting their vote for the pervertpotus, he may regret some of his words in the heat of an election season. I forgive him. He might be young and be learning about life in a society where white privilege and entitlement is A race card used EVERY DAY to salve the sensibilities of sensitive wypipo. He might not. The point here is wypipo as a term of description used by many to say, white people. Better than what many here and in society MAY use in describing blapipo.
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)stupidest thing I have seen here in all that time and I have seen some stupid things here.
The intellectual level of this board has gone down hill. The thought that most of the popular posters here buy into wypipo just blows my mind. And the thought that they have such a campaign on to force wypipo down everyone's throat is unbelievable.
wypipo is growing bigger than circumcision and porn in the ranking of stupid debate topics I think.
phylny
(8,540 posts)goal. Now, it's all about ridiculing people for being butt-hurt and our collective "tears."
get the red out
(13,542 posts)I am a white person who pretty much stays angry and sick over the horrifically evil attitudes exhibited by huge numbers of people who look like me. I put these people down a lot in conversation and I will not repent any time soon. But I also wonder how much more division this country can take?
I am completely outraged at animal abuse, I also totally lose my shit over these horrific police murders of black people. Our society is becoming a nightmare.
Boomer
(4,241 posts)>> Our society is becoming a nightmare. <<
No, it's not. It feels that way because we're becoming more aware of how badly humans treat humans (and animals) and we've learned to disapprove. But bad behavior has been the norm for thousands of years. I wouldn't trade the Trump era for a return to even 100 years ago or anytime before then. Tender, delicate sensibilities is a new luxury.
Caliman73
(11,767 posts)Society has become less violent and virulently racist over the centuries. As you said, the reason people feel things are worse now, is because the light is being shown on each individual or group act of racism while it is happening, in the same way that violent crimes are trending downward, but people are more afraid because the local news shows you an armed robbery or crime that was committed 1000 miles away. While that can be disheartening to many people, it does not mean that things are worse than they were when lynching was okay, when Sheriff's, judges, and politicians were proudly in the KKK, or when it was very legal to discriminate against people of color. Things are not changing as fast as we would like, and the privilege and attitudes that exist in people who have not considered themselves racist nor who express any racist acts or attitudes overtly, have been coming to light more recently.
The thing about human beings is that when the problem is "other people" then you can fight it and condemn those bad former Confederates, or Neo Nazis, or hillbillies. The problem is that when our own behavior ad attitudes of questioning the motives of BLM, or not wanting to engage in "identity politics" or be "divisive" then it strikes closer to home and we tend to feel more defensive, especially if we see ourselves as allies.
I think that as a whole, we are not more divided. I think that among those who are divided, the division is deeper and more pronounced because the Rightwing has their own media, and we tend not to view that.
BumRushDaShow
(140,481 posts)Thanks to instant media, people are "seeing" into each others' worlds more than ever before. I.e., there is increased exposure, not just culturally, but economically as well - the "haves" and the "have nots".
Used to be that to see some of the very wealthy (i.e., those willing to be featured) in a publication, you needed to get a copy of "Town and Country" or "Architectural Digest" or maybe see an episode of "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous" . Now you can just use a search engine and look at photos and videos of all of the trappings of wealth.
Similarly, the advent of cell phone videos have opened up a whole new world to some, where they can see how black people are continually harassed in public places. And what was continually deemed over and over as "isolated incidents", has become a tsunami of "isolated incidents" that basically establish a pattern. And it is frightening for some to see or believe because it is not something that is relatable.
Caliman73
(11,767 posts)There are definitely positives and negatives to the instantaneous transmission of information. The positives are exactly what you describe, people are being awakened from their bubbles where the idea of a "post racial" or egalitarian society was the truth. They see the hundred or so incidents (likely more) that are captured on someone's cell phone and if they choose to, see the pattern that belies their ideas.
The negative aspect is that it is much easier to sell fear for those who choose to sell it. Crime rates may actually drop 20% over a 5 year period, but if coverage of those decreasing crime rates goes up by 400%, it may seem that our society is coming apart at the seems and it serves to isolate us from one another. The reality is the my kids are likely safer than I was growing up, even being out on the street playing with their friends, but it is difficult to convince my family and friends of that because some kid in New York got kidnapped a few weeks ago. So, my kids end up having to stay inside rather than playing on their bicycles with their friends.
BumRushDaShow
(140,481 posts)The tech actually tends to magnify and we as humans tend to internalize that - particularly if it is something that is negative. And that is what helped to give birth to the stuff that Cambridge Analytica did.
Abu Pepe
(637 posts)I hear racist people say that a lot.
Pretty fucked up.
HopeAgain
(4,407 posts)Any dog-mouth kissers in here?
grossproffit
(5,591 posts)EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)xmas74
(29,741 posts)As someone who is white most of the crap wypipo do is garbage. Wypipo are garbage people who only care about what directly affects them and their families. They don't care about poverty in the Appalachians, they don't care about police brutality in the cities. They proudly have Trump is president-get over it bumper stickers, they overlook when Trevor the star high school quarterback rapes Jenna at a party because "alcohol can make things happen and did you see her dress?" Wypipo scream about local animal shelters occasionally putting down very sick animals but turn the channel when they are faced with the very sick children of Flint.
Wypipo are garbage people who have been in power for too long and are resisting the winds of change. And they only use a tiny bit of salt, no paprika and add raisins to their potato salad.