Re: The guy who got fired from his job to make way for a woman

Frankly, I'd rather the employer would have fired a white chick in order to open a spot to hire a black male.

I believe the guy is assuming that if the OP hadn't been white, even though he's male, he might have kept his job. This is actually not always true, as for example asian people may often also be treated essentially as non-minorities in many circumstances. But it might have been the case, just not proven.

The truth is: as a group white women are currently the most "entitled" human beings on the face of the planet. Unlike the the issue of race, where people are statistically more likely to be born into a ghetto by virtue of being born black or born Hispanic, white women are no more likely to be born into poverty than are white men. Their birth to families is a statistically randomized act. And, as any good scientist will tell you, randomization is the ultimate equalizer between groups.

Despite this obvious fact, certain people often insist that women be treated with chivalrous white knight gloves from the day they are born. This is not fairness, but bullcrap chivalry -- in reality, unfairness.

And despite the fact that young white women are randomly born to the same frequently suburban white lifestyles as their white male siblings, as a group, women are the biggest, loudest damselers on the face of the planet, generally beginning when they enter college. The worst part is, they tend to drown out those who do have legitimate claims to disadvantage. Does a white chick who grew up with white parents in a suburban white neighborhood really need special treatment when her daddy and mommy send her off to college? Based on those circumstances, no.

In general, a white girl accesses the same economic resources as her white male siblings as she grows up, yet somehow she believes that her white princess existence and the existence of her white vag, entitles her to a smorgasbord of special perks and privileges.

This is of course a load of complete crap.

Last I checked, there are no all-girl ghettos keeping the white girl down.

But the OPs post brings up a salient point, which is the problem with identify politics. Namely, the biggest indicator of disadvantage, is the socioeconomic status of the family background. Not race per se (though certain ethnicity are more likely to be born into poverty than are others), and certainly not at all gender.

One wonders to what extent feminists have hijacked and exploited the politics of identity to their own advantage, to the exclusion and detriment to those really in need, whether they be black or white. I certainly see the obvious incentive there for them to do so. And to be honest, more often black than white. But why employ a surrogate marker for the most important issue (socioeconomic status of upbringing) when you can employ the real thing?

I think that's the real shame in all of this.