whites

Similarly, you can track power distribution between men and women, or between whites and blacks in the US.

Oh, nevermind that does not qualify because it is against whites and males, so it is ok.

Based on their charts, Asians are massively overrepresented and whites are underrepresented compared to US population.

Now that whites are far more directly endangered by police, one sees articles like this pop up all the time.

Even when brought in via affirmative action, minorities are consistently weeded out at higher rates than, say, whites or men.

That involves more subtle distinction of colors than merely separating whites from coloreds should.

By race, it was 3.9% for whites, 12.3% for blacks, and 5.8% for hispanics.

Minorities complain about a lot of things that some whites don't understand.

It's to the subset of whites that are labelled as such.

The study varied postal addresses and included African American names from richer neighborhoods and whites from poorer neighborhoods, and included both low and high quality resumes.

I only made the typical HN/Reddit-like comment so prevalent on anything like this if it were to show men/non-whites/Americans in a positive light.

Separating whites from coloreds [1] should be achievable now.

As an example, I'm 175# and can bench press 285# (3 whites) but I'm not a "strong male athlete" by any means.

It's not to whites in general that the term "white trash" will be offensive.

From the article you link to: "Overall, blacks were killed at three times the rate of whites or other minorities when adjusting by the population of the census tracts where the shootings occurred."

Hypothetically, if people were associating black names with low class more then white names, then there should be a significant difference in the benefits of a "good" neighborhood between whites with a good neighborhood and blacks.