~ archived since 2018 ~

How many SMV points do minorities lose for not being white and white privileged?

WhitePrivilegeExpert

August 27, 2018

0 upvotes

/r/askTRP

Archived from /r/askTRP

r/askTRP is a subreddit for Red Pill Discussion for personalized questions about specific situations, people, scenarios.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/askTRP archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Post Information

Title	How many SMV points do minorities lose for not being white and white privileged?
Author	WhitePrivilegeExpert
Upvotes	0
Comments	48
Date	August 27, 2018 7:39 PM UTC (7 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/askTRP
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/asktrp/comments/9as2lt/how_many_smv_points_do_minorities_lose_for_not/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/askTRP/how-many-smv-points-do-minorities-lose-for-not.131383 https://theredarchive.com/post/131383

Comments

[–]RPGivesYouWings4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]WhitePrivilegeExpert 1 points 7 years ago [recovered] (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]RPGivesYouWings2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

I think I take issue with your premise: that it impacts SMV, or rather, that whites are granted additional “points” simply by being white.

For the sake of the argument and staying relative to the purposes of the sub, I’ll only feed this troll on this narrow scope, not “all contexts of society”.

I am familiar with the analyses of online dating preferences: white males and Asian females are preferentially selected by all races. There is something to be explored there... but I’m not so sure that the selection preference is tied to race causally, but the correlation isn’t disputable.

When someone evaluates you visually and quickly, as we all do, they rely on certain assumptions (arguably, stereotypes) based on our experiences... both real and societally transferred via media.

There is a correlation between race and socioeconomic status. There is a correlation between race and many other factors, but again race isn’t scientifically or statistically proven to be the causal factor.

That’s why for the most part TRP focuses on individual behaviors and mental models that result in higher attraction of women. Sure, those stereotypes and presuppositions put minorities at an initial deficit, but I’d posit that they’re easily overcome at the individual level... and would thus determine that the SMV isn’t impacted permanently or in actuality.

[–]WhitePrivilegeExpert 1 points 7 years ago [recovered] (6 children) | Copy Link

I would still argue that it has less to do about assumptions ad preconceptions predicated on the negative perceptions of a certain race in society, but simply by being a certain race, pertaining to both dating and other contexts in general. For example, asians are ostensibly richer and commit less crime than even whites, but this seems to do nothing for the outcomes that they receive in dating. My argument still is that if an asian man were to raise his smv and do everything right, he still will not have the same equity as a white man where everything is equal, and that paradigm is intrinsic to my op, and the question is how much ?

I am not disputing that a minority can increase his opportunity by following red pill principles, though in the macros i am at odds as to HOW MUCH. For example, 50% of white women on online dating sites purport that they would not dat someone who isn't white. To me that would mean that no matter how much money he makes or how big his muscles are , a mutually exclusive amount of women simply wont go for it regardless of smv.

[–]RPGivesYouWings1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Well you’ve gone from a generality towards a specificity, namely, white women.

The selection bias of individuals, where those individuals have a group identity (in this case, race), can be mistakenly ascribed as the bias of a group — and that’s a slippery slope as it ignores individuals.

I think TRP position holds. As individuals raise their SMV, the group dynamics and stereotypes would thus change, but it starts and ends at the level of the individual.

That’s why you’re getting shit on here— playing with group identities is anathema... not only from the philosophical level, but also because it provides an excuse to individuals to see their circumstances as insurmountable— and that sort of victim mentality is an awful set of clothing to wear, regardless of your race, height, sexual orientation, level of intelligence, penis endowment, etc etc etc.

[–]WhitePrivilegeExpert[S] -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

White women are the majority of women in the u.s and your smv is predicated on being able to attract white women sense they are viewed as the most attractive and have the highest smvs.

My beliefs aren't predicated on extrapolating individual white womens biases and ascribing them to the entire group : my point of view is that most of them have such ingroup preferences based on the evidence that we have, and what this means for the smv of the average ethnic(im white btw)

I disagree. As i said, when comparing apples to apples, bias still pervades against men of color . If a white man has 7 and an indian man has 8, that white man wins 9/10. If a white man has 10 and an indian has 10, that white man wins. Again, this doesn't mean that a POC can't have success, but that he still won't have the same equity of a white male even if he's a t the same level.

lol THey're free to get triggered . Actual grievances and disadvantages aren't predicated on whether you have a victim mindset or not, and it's definitely helpful to know what they are . It would make no sense for a black man to waste his time trying to fruitlessly approach in a place in which he is very disadvantaged because of his race. Being cognizant of your disadvantages can actually empower and help you create a path to success. This whole "you have a victim complex" on matters of race is often just a bullshit talking point by white or otherwise privileged people when concerning such matters that is based in their own white fragility.

[–]RPGivesYouWings1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]WhitePrivilegeExpert 1 points 7 years ago [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

lol fuck off with this gaslighting bullshit. The fact that you've already jumped to the notion of me making a straman and purposely misrepresenting your agrument , instead of simply stating HOW i did, is indicative of your typical red pill biased faggorty. Point out how i misrepresented or fuck off. And it really ins't about misrepresenting anything; what i just told you are my fundamental beliefs about racial dynamics in our society.

lol idgaf about being banned on this sub or any other. I take solace in triggering white privileged , conservative sjws.

If identity politics are dangerous then i'd encourage you to convince whites of the same thing while they're out voting for white identity politics in trump , as you vote for him a second time as well. Ahhhh , but it's only identity politics if the identity is anything but white male . This very bias proves my point about white privilege .

Look at who's making a strawman . Of course they're nuanced, which is why this mindest on the TRP that race is just an excuse and irrelevant is also stupid.

[–]RPGivesYouWings1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You seem like a hungry troll.... open up:

White women are the majority of women in the u.s and your smv is predicated on being able to attract white women sense they are viewed as the most attractive and have the highest smvs.

No one here asserts that white women's interest is the measure of SMV. In fact, your own post and comment history acknowledge that Asian women are the most attractive.

For example, asians are ostensibly richer and commit less crime than even whites, but this seems to do nothing for the outcomes that they receive in dating.

No one here asserts that positive finances and criminality results in higher dating success in isolation.

This whole "you have a victim complex" on matters of race is often just a bullshit talking point by white or otherwise privileged people when concerning such matters that is based in their own white fragility.

My point was that you're playing with group identities and the danger was that it creates an excuse to settle for being less than your potential, as an individual.

---

From your last comment:

this mindest on the TRP that race is just an excuse and irrelevant is also stupid

The assertion is that it is surmountable for actualizing a successful sexual strategy as an individual.

Bro, I'm saying that you came here to kick the hornets nest and not gain an understanding or clarity of TRP and its tenants, and that's why you should tread lightly. Be as inflammatory and ignorant as you'd like, but don't expect your adventure to last terribly long.

[–]WhitePrivilegeExpert[S] 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

IM asserting that their interest and ability to get them is indicative of your SMV, which is why im focusing on them, not to mention their population size. So, this doesn't meet your litmus and claim of a straman argument.

Asian women are not the most attractive. It's simply supply and demand.

So what does the m in "lms" mean? Just a placeholder? I definitely think criminality and wealth is a factor in SMV , i just think it is substantial , and especially not compared to race and face.

And im saying that white society wholly playss identity politics and to not understand such a paradigm while living in it can only perpetuate yourself into victimhood if you aren't educated to possibly ameliorate those intrinsic disadvantages. An ugly 5'5 indian shouldn't waste his time by gaming white sorority girls in suburbia in the "Deep " north, but rather move to a big city and game, which is slightly less racist. Only slightly.

"The assertion is that it is surmountable for actualizing a successful sexual strategy as an individual."

I think we should define what success is. The 5'5 ugly indian can get a laid, but i certainly don't think it'll be consistently and with women of high quality. He can do all the squats he wants, it wont get him a hot blue eyed , blond haired aryan sorority girl consistently , if ever.

[–]CalvinRichland1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]WhitePrivilegeExpert[S] -2 points-1 points0 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]CalvinRichland3 points4 points5 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]WhitePrivilegeExpert[S] 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]CalvinRichland1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]WhitePrivilegeExpert[S] 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]CalvinRichland2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Blackhawk24795 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]WhitePrivilegeExpert[S] -5 points-4 points-3 points 7 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]Blackhawk24791 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]WhitePrivilegeExpert[S] -2 points-1 points0 points 7 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]DevilishRogue2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]WhitePrivilegeExpert[S] -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]DevilishRogue2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]WhitePrivilegeExpert[S] 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]DevilishRogue2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

lol are you sure? You think you're so smart.

Well, one of us is and one of us ain't if you are still trying to turn this into a debate.

You think you know everything. It can lead you to having some very fallacious positions: http://www.nber.org/digest/sep03/w9873.html

You seem to think this is an ace up your sleeve but it doesn't even address, let alone prove, the concept of white privilege - and that's without getting into it's lack of applicability to the SMP.

You literally just said that there is no white privilege. That's your own affirmative position and claim. Please provide the evidence for having and making such a claim.

Are you on the spectrum? Of course there is no white privilege. What do you imagine white people get from the SMP that non-white's don't?

lol if it's not the lace for argument, don't argue, which is what you initially did.

I explained (whitesplained?) to you an issue you seem to struggle to understand.

Also, that sub doesn't allow you to talk about white people , ie "race baiting".

You can talk about the impact of ethnicity on SMV without race baiting (well, other people can - you yourself seem to struggle). Are you a racist yourself? If your username isn't sarcastic it certainly appears that way (although the lack of self-awareness is amusing).

[–]WhitePrivilegeExpert[S] 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]DevilishRogue1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Don't be ridiculous , you opened up the can by saying it doesn't exist. If you dont want to debate, simply stop responding .

Attempting to assert yourself in this manner is not Alpha, it is wannabe.

Lol If whites get 50% more resume responses, how in the hell does that not prove white privilege?

Are you an idiot? It proves that names have associations. A black guy with the name William Jacobs will create a different association to a white guy called Rex Dallas that has nothing to do with skin color.

This white privilege is also seen in dating. https://theblog.okcupid.com/race-and-attraction-2009-2014-107dcbb4f060

Preference? You are arguing that preference is privilege? Overcoming preference barriers is someone everyone has to do, especially online.

Again, prove it. You keep asserting it and you have cited not a shred of evidence.

You are asking me to prove a negative. Do you need me to explain what the problem with that is?

Nah, I've already tried that and it got removed.

That's almost certainly because you are a racist and didn't couch the issue in objective terms.

[–]WhitePrivilegeExpert1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

"Are you an idiot? It proves that names have associations. A black guy with the name William Jacobs will create a different association to a white guy called Rex Dallas that has nothing to do with skin color."

You really need to critically re think about your logic here as anyone reading this can discern the fallacy in your conclusion. Names hold associations , absolutely. The association is race. Noah is white. Jamal is black. BOOM. You just proved my point. If a name is an identifier of race, and people give white name credence, THAT"S WHITE PRIVILEGE. A black man that names himself a name that will indicate that he is European will ABSOLUTELY get him more responses, and that's precisely white privilege! You're proving my point man. You have absolutely no evidence to prove that Rex will get less resume responses. Even then, it's a false equivalence to compare what an ostensibly bad white name with a regular, normal every day black name like Tyrone or lakeisha. This further proves my point in that it's not the names, but it's black people in general who are stigmatized. This is white privilege.

That's not my problem. If You asserted it doesn't exist , then indeed you perceivably have evidence and empirical data that it doesn't. I can prove the sky isn't yellow, because it's in fact blue.

Im white, i can't be racist. /s

[–]DevilishRogue2 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Names hold associations , absolutely. The association is race.

The association goes so far beyond race that only someone blind to the point of ignorance would pretend that was the be all and end all.

If a name is an identifier of race, and people give white name credence, THAT"S WHITE PRIVILEGE.

No, it is familiarity. You do understand preference for the familiar transcends race, right?

A black man that names himself a name that will indicate that he is European will ABSOLUTELY get him more responses

That's not white privilege either. Pretending that it is is why you are wrong.

You have absolutely no evidence to prove that Rex will get less resume responses.

That's a straw man. I was explaining the difference between associations and privilege.

This further proves my point in that it's not the names, but it's black people in general who are stigmatized. This is white privilege.

Are black people prevented by law from changing their names? Nor are white people. There is no privilege, there is only association.

That's not my problem. If You asserted it doesn't exist , then indeed you perceivably have evidence and empirical data that it doesn't. I can prove the sky isn't yellow, because it's in fact blue.

If you don't even understand the concept of not proving a negative, you are literally too stupid to warrant further response. And I've humored you despite your racism because you seem genuinely ignorant rather than merely malicious at the outset and could have simply been on the defensive because your fragile worldview was contradicted and you don't have an adequate response other than doubling down on your faith-based conviction.

Im white, i can't be racist. /s

You are a racist. Whether you realise or admit it doesn't change the fact. Furthermore you project your own racism onto others, because despite the obvious cues demonstrating otherwise you are incapable of accepting that other people might think differently to you. Perhaps when you are older and wiser and have a bit ore like experience behind you you'll realise how foolish you've been but taking into account how you've conducted yourself in this exchange that seems closer to a decade or more than years.

[–]WhitePrivilegeExpert1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]DevilishRogue3 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]WhitePrivilegeExpert1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]DevilishRogue3 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]WhitePrivilegeExpert1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]stylesm112 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]WhitePrivilegeExpert[S] 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]stylesm111 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ekken_2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]WhitePrivilegeExpert[S] -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Zweint5 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]carlito_suave -3 points-2 points-1 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]WhitePrivilegeExpert[S] 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]carlito_suave 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]carlito_suave -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]WhitePrivilegeExpert[S] 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]carlito_suave -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link