Black Privilege Is Real

Do you have any points that coincide with the noun version of privilege? No since I used it in my rebuttals. You act like I made up that definition, That's from Google. So you can't really pick apart from it too much, It just won't work. You also can't try to prove me wrong over a factual definition. These are facts. This is research. You can't deny facts. All you're making your own misguided assumptions. Act another word used to state something I did not do. If I did you would have quoted me but instead you state I acted in a certain way that you perceived that I thought your definitions were made up. Read my arguments again. I simply stated you did not provide sources. What facts did you use? Definitions and facts that prove that you used an anecdotal fallacy. I didn't make that claim. The definition states that. You point out the definition and have no evidence to prove this definition to be true. Systemic requires laws that give an unfair advantages to white people. The definition states systemic and you define it but did not prove it to be true. That definition states everything about the privileges white people have. That definition is wrong. For it be true you require to give a systemic privilege that is given to whites. What? So Indian people, Or Mexican people who tend to have melanin and darker skin -- does that mean their race is black instead of Indian or Mexican? Black people: Black people is a term used in certain countries, Often in socially based systems of racial classification or of ethnicity, To describe persons who are perceived to be dark-skinned compared to other populations. (Wikipedia)From the definition for someone to be called black they require dark skin. Wow you used the same definition. Guess that proves my point that either you don't agree with the definition that you picked out or forgot to say what is wrong with the definition you used. But black people are also light skinned. There are fair skinned black people. Going against the definition you have used. White Privilege has an official definition for itself. Doesn't mean it isn't a bad definition. You still have not pointed out systemic privilege that whites currently have. Without proof this definition is wrong. You used the noun version of privilege okay, Guess you realised I used the noun version and still have the first paragraph in. How did you reach the topic of skin color? If you looked at the definition you used for black people you would realise it is based on skin colour. And why do you keep saying brown and black people. Point to where I said brown people and say how I used brown people as much as black. I checked and used brown once and black 17 times and that was in my Round 1. In Round 2 I did not even use the word brown once. I am sure for me to keep on using brown I would require to say it more then once in my argument. Okay but some celebrities started from the bottomHow does this matter? At the very moment I am speaking about Lebron James he is a celebrity. They weren't "privileged" all of their life. I never said that. You assumed it. I know what it means and I know what a celebrity is. If you read my argument you would have realised where the definition of celebrity was. I told you to look them up for yourself because for some reason DDO won't allow linksYou could have asked me in the comment section I can't add links. Then I would I said add them like this X (CNN). I do remember telling you in the comment section on how to link the sources without using the URL. Merriam Webster definitionsWhich is why in brackets I have where the definition came from. You also used it in this argument but now you are defending you not including where you found the source in Round 2 instead of pointing out you made a mistake. Your job is to say what you mean and mean what you say, Point blank period. No one has to kiss your a**Bad conduct. I never you should you assumed that. which seemed very clear to meAnother instance of you assuming my intention without asking it. "If white privilege is a thing then black privilege is also a thing. " Negative. Do I need to say anything? He said I am wrong without explaining it. I did not do that but you did. "basing a lot on a person's skin color" that's exactly the point. You can't run away from that. In what way did I do that? Provided no examples. You have also misquoted me I said I am not basing a lot on a person's skin colour. A better phrase then white privilege is ancestry privilege. You left out I am not to either mislead viewers or it was a mistake or something else entirely. I also gave a better word to fit wealth gains of past generations but you didn't also include that. There's white people who have dark hair and eyes. Did I say that? I don't think I did. Read the quote above. He states that's exactly the point. Meaning he agrees with what I said and somehow says this. "People who have an advantage of darker skin. " No, Another claim made without explaining why his stance is true. Us black people have to worry about the media portraying this idea that white is beautiful. You have categorised every single black person going through the same worrying portrayal. I don't think I need to rebut this but I will. The likelihood of one single black person not worrying about this is really high. You have lumped every single black person and stating they would also go through this as if the only thing black people have similar is the colour of their skin. Not every black person goes through this. I can state one example the homeless man or maybe that is also fake news. The one that was given 50 years. If he was supposedly homeless how could he possible see the media portrayal? This example should be enough to prove that not every black person would worry about this since they would not see it or they have something else to worry about like food and shelter. I want to just stick to this debate. If you wanted to stick to the debate you would have removed 3 lines from that paragraph but you didn't. What is wrong with basing my argument from anecdotal evidence? If you read what I said then you would realise why it is bad. I say it again you used an two anecdotes to paint a picture on two entire races. You deny the whites and blacks who are not affected by it. was merely showcasing the difference between the two races, No you also said Prime example of white privilege so you did use it to show an example of white privilege as if every single black and white person would go through with this. I wasn't going off of my own experienceAnecdote: An anecdote is a brief, Revealing account of an individual person or an incident. (Wikipedia)You did use two individual people or 1 incident to prove how one entire race has privilege. So I think you may have to reevaluate some things and throw anecdotal "fallacy" out. I have said why you used it twice now. One in the question you gave me above and the other in the last Round. About the man stealing the rack of ribs - whenever you get through, He got put in prison for half a century whereas (from your source) the billionaire who rapes his 3 year old daughter got probation. This only further helps my argument. None other than white privilege. This clearly states that Con did not read what I said about his sources and his conclusion. It is the second last rebuttal I did in Round 2. It stated my point and Con did not rebut it instead he did not even mention about the validity of his source. Of course any source I send or anything I say you're gonna think it's fake or disagree with. Still haven't changed from the Naruto debate. I never said that. You are assuming again. Maybe you did read what I said but did not rebut it. Your source is fake news. I gave a fact checking source and used it to prove your source wrong. You also changed from the Naruto debate either.