A Question of Privilege
April 15, 2016 4:56 AM Subscribe
Writer Marti Leimbach explores how her personal circumstances make it difficult for her to define privilege.
This whole notion of “privilege” vexes me. We talk about it as though we can all recognise what it is. I am not always so sure. I can tell one narrative of my life and it seems to describe someone who grew up without privilege, and I can tell another narrative and it seems almost as though my life was one of ease and privilege from the time I was born.Previously
Yeah this seems like a willful misunderstanding of the way the term is used-- not to describe certain lives as frictionless and fortunate but about how different demographics are treated by social institutions. I don't think I've ever seen anyone try to claim the straw man this writer is setting up, that class privilege will protect you from sexual assault or abuse, and the rest of the essay seems built on a similar refusal to engage with the actual discourse around this word. This "but how can you say I'm privileged, I've suffered too" narrative is very 2005 tbh, and it's strange to see it here on the blue in 2016. I feel like this person's poor college-age child is somewhere burying her face in her hands in frustration right now.
posted by moonlight on vermont at 5:15 AM on April 15, 2016 [36 favorites]
posted by moonlight on vermont at 5:15 AM on April 15, 2016 [36 favorites]
Well, big surprise there. Privilege is, by its very nature, something that is difficult to see in yourself. It's also something that is difficult to see in others if it's a privilege you also possess (though not usually as difficult as the self-identification). Now, assume that you're self-aware enough to know what your privilege is, and *of course* it's trivial to narrate your life in both forms.
posted by mystyk at 5:18 AM on April 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by mystyk at 5:18 AM on April 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
I feel like there is ... I don't know a cottage industry of white people writing about Their Pain couched in terms of "what is privilege, really?" And these stories they write can be effecting and empathy-building or whatever -- I certainly am not going to be down on this woman talking about her rough life -- but on the other hand it, every single time, feels like an "I want in on this whole privilege thing" or, and this particular essay is more like this, "who really knows what privilege is because many lives are hard! Like mine!"
It's just hard to see essays like this as anything but people confronted with the idea of privilege in maybe not the best ways -- a college age child lecturing you on it, for instance -- and reacting by making sure you know very well that their life was hard, too!
posted by griphus at 5:18 AM on April 15, 2016 [37 favorites]
It's just hard to see essays like this as anything but people confronted with the idea of privilege in maybe not the best ways -- a college age child lecturing you on it, for instance -- and reacting by making sure you know very well that their life was hard, too!
posted by griphus at 5:18 AM on April 15, 2016 [37 favorites]
I agree: except that I've found that intersectionality is often poorly understood even by those who talk about it, and rarely applied.
The word "privilege" is deeply problematic. It confuses people, it implies things that we don't intend to. People hear "privilege" and they think "country club and yachts", and think "that isn't me." Or - as this essay so eloquently points out - sometimes country clubs and yachts are not always that great.
I can't think of a better word, but we need to recognize forms of privilege. But we also need to do so without declaring a specific person "privileged" because you really don't know what invisible disadvantages they may have.
posted by jb at 5:21 AM on April 15, 2016 [15 favorites]
The word "privilege" is deeply problematic. It confuses people, it implies things that we don't intend to. People hear "privilege" and they think "country club and yachts", and think "that isn't me." Or - as this essay so eloquently points out - sometimes country clubs and yachts are not always that great.
I can't think of a better word, but we need to recognize forms of privilege. But we also need to do so without declaring a specific person "privileged" because you really don't know what invisible disadvantages they may have.
posted by jb at 5:21 AM on April 15, 2016 [15 favorites]
IT'S NOT FUCKING MATH.
(breathes)
Sorry. But this idea that you can add up "single mom" (1.4) and "lower middle class" (0.3) and "white" (-2.7) and "Harvard" (-6.4) and "scholarship" (-0.1), and hey presto, you have a Total Privilege Rating of -8.5 and you are therefore privileged at the 87th percentile and UGH shoot me.
posted by Etrigan at 5:23 AM on April 15, 2016 [69 favorites]
(breathes)
Sorry. But this idea that you can add up "single mom" (1.4) and "lower middle class" (0.3) and "white" (-2.7) and "Harvard" (-6.4) and "scholarship" (-0.1), and hey presto, you have a Total Privilege Rating of -8.5 and you are therefore privileged at the 87th percentile and UGH shoot me.
posted by Etrigan at 5:23 AM on April 15, 2016 [69 favorites]
I shit you not on tumblr -- a website whose existence and overly-earnest populace I have and will continue to defend -- i saw a not-particularly-tongue-in-cheek chart breaking down privilege exactly like that; a series of points you get for being or having experienced certain things that you add up and the positive number at the end tells you how privileged you are. Simultaneously a kind-of-useful but at the same time horribly counterproductive way to teach anyone but the most already-on-board people about the concept.
For some reason it said "Jewish: +10 points" which was ... delightful
posted by griphus at 5:27 AM on April 15, 2016 [27 favorites]
For some reason it said "Jewish: +10 points" which was ... delightful
posted by griphus at 5:27 AM on April 15, 2016 [27 favorites]
Sorry: that agree was to hoyland's original comment about intersectionality.
I don't agree with the following of the comments.
Is intersectionality a concept that doesn't apply in you are white? One can't be disabled and white, poor and white, or (as half my family is) poor and disabled and white?
Moreover: This woman isn't saying that she doesn't have any privilege. She's pointing out that social privilege (class, race) can be combined with personal disadvantage (abuse). And her greater point is that she thinks that her lack of class privilege (compared to her husband's class) was actually an advantage.
As for her college age daughter: she may be face palming, if she had a typical college-age black & white view of the world. But the rest of us grow beyond that after college.
posted by jb at 5:28 AM on April 15, 2016 [5 favorites]
I don't agree with the following of the comments.
Is intersectionality a concept that doesn't apply in you are white? One can't be disabled and white, poor and white, or (as half my family is) poor and disabled and white?
Moreover: This woman isn't saying that she doesn't have any privilege. She's pointing out that social privilege (class, race) can be combined with personal disadvantage (abuse). And her greater point is that she thinks that her lack of class privilege (compared to her husband's class) was actually an advantage.
As for her college age daughter: she may be face palming, if she had a typical college-age black & white view of the world. But the rest of us grow beyond that after college.
posted by jb at 5:28 AM on April 15, 2016 [5 favorites]
Hi, writer person! Did you know that you can literally google "Privilege 101" on the internet? If you do so, and go to the very first link you see, and read a little, you will notice that point 3 reads:
"3. Privileges and oppressions affect each other, but they don’t negate each other ... The interaction between different aspects of our identities is often referred to as an intersection ... As Phoenix Calida wrote: 'Privilege simply means that under the exact same set of circumstances you’re in, life would be harder without your privilege. Being poor is hard. Being poor and disabled is harder. Being a woman is hard. Being a trans woman is harder ...'"
posted by kyrademon at 5:31 AM on April 15, 2016 [13 favorites]
"3. Privileges and oppressions affect each other, but they don’t negate each other ... The interaction between different aspects of our identities is often referred to as an intersection ... As Phoenix Calida wrote: 'Privilege simply means that under the exact same set of circumstances you’re in, life would be harder without your privilege. Being poor is hard. Being poor and disabled is harder. Being a woman is hard. Being a trans woman is harder ...'"
posted by kyrademon at 5:31 AM on April 15, 2016 [13 favorites]
Is intersectionality a concept that doesn't apply in you are white? One can't be disabled and white, poor and white, or (as half my family is) poor and disabled and white?
What? Intersectionality absolutely applies if you're white. Where did you get the idea that it doesn't?
I thought the article was better than some of its ilk, but as griphus said privilege isn't a calculator, and even if it were you're not going to gain much insight looking purely at one side or the other of the ledger.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 5:34 AM on April 15, 2016 [4 favorites]
What? Intersectionality absolutely applies if you're white. Where did you get the idea that it doesn't?
I thought the article was better than some of its ilk, but as griphus said privilege isn't a calculator, and even if it were you're not going to gain much insight looking purely at one side or the other of the ledger.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 5:34 AM on April 15, 2016 [4 favorites]
The more I read and listen to people who know more about privilege than I do (that is, damn near everyone), it seems seeing privilege is like looking at your own eyes: you can't do it without a mirror.
posted by Mooski at 5:44 AM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by Mooski at 5:44 AM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
What I don't get is, where are all these articles taking the stance "privilege isn't complicated, there's a classification of people into two types, privileged and not privileged" that this piece argues against? Are they maybe in Salon? I never read Salon.
posted by escabeche at 5:45 AM on April 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by escabeche at 5:45 AM on April 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
What? Intersectionality absolutely applies if you're white. Where did you get the idea that it doesn't?
There seems to be a train of thought - possibly associated with Patricia Hill Collins - that it's a concept that can only apply to women of colour (or even specifically African American women) and the use of the concept by other people is a form of appropriation. I'm really not in a position to agree or disagree with that notion, but I've seen it expressed. If you google around it you'll get the general idea.
posted by Grangousier at 5:51 AM on April 15, 2016 [3 favorites]
There seems to be a train of thought - possibly associated with Patricia Hill Collins - that it's a concept that can only apply to women of colour (or even specifically African American women) and the use of the concept by other people is a form of appropriation. I'm really not in a position to agree or disagree with that notion, but I've seen it expressed. If you google around it you'll get the general idea.
posted by Grangousier at 5:51 AM on April 15, 2016 [3 favorites]
I feel like there is ... I don't know a cottage industry of white people writing about Their Pain couched in terms of "what is privilege, really?"
I agree with everyone here that the author doesn't have a good understanding of what privilege is and that it's a weird lens through which to view her experiences, but I think stuff like sarcastically calling what she writes about here "[Her] Pain" is probably part of how she ended up so defensive in the first place.
posted by thetortoise at 5:56 AM on April 15, 2016 [9 favorites]
I agree with everyone here that the author doesn't have a good understanding of what privilege is and that it's a weird lens through which to view her experiences, but I think stuff like sarcastically calling what she writes about here "[Her] Pain" is probably part of how she ended up so defensive in the first place.
posted by thetortoise at 5:56 AM on April 15, 2016 [9 favorites]
> People hear "privilege" and they think "country club and yachts", and think "that isn't me."
The difference between the academic definition of privilege and the vernacular definition is pretty big.
They also think of things that are "nice to have but not really essential" that are granted and can be taken away, like "if you don't do your homework and chores your TV privileges we'll be taken away," or "sophomores and seniors in good academic standing will have the privilege of leaving campus early if their last periods are study halls."
posted by Gev at 5:57 AM on April 15, 2016 [10 favorites]
The difference between the academic definition of privilege and the vernacular definition is pretty big.
They also think of things that are "nice to have but not really essential" that are granted and can be taken away, like "if you don't do your homework and chores your TV privileges we'll be taken away," or "sophomores and seniors in good academic standing will have the privilege of leaving campus early if their last periods are study halls."
posted by Gev at 5:57 AM on April 15, 2016 [10 favorites]
...but I think stuff like sarcastically calling what she writes about here "[Her] Pain" is probably part of how she ended up so defensive in the first place.
That certainly wasn't intended to come off as sarcastic. Only that the writers of these pieces often put their own selves and experience at a forefront that's quite removed from an actual discussion of privilege and instead turn the discussion entirely onto themselves and their feelings on how being called "privileged" is, in some way, wrong or hurtful (as opposed to genuinely exploring the concept in relation to themselves.)
posted by griphus at 6:00 AM on April 15, 2016 [3 favorites]
That certainly wasn't intended to come off as sarcastic. Only that the writers of these pieces often put their own selves and experience at a forefront that's quite removed from an actual discussion of privilege and instead turn the discussion entirely onto themselves and their feelings on how being called "privileged" is, in some way, wrong or hurtful (as opposed to genuinely exploring the concept in relation to themselves.)
posted by griphus at 6:00 AM on April 15, 2016 [3 favorites]
Is intersectionality a concept that doesn't apply in you are white?Technically, yes, since the word was created by Kimberlé Crenshaw to describe how her feminist activism intersected with her black activism, and the specific form of misogyny that black women face-which is now referred to as misgynoir.
I can't think of a better word, but we need to recognize forms of privilege. But we also need to do so without declaring a specific person "privileged" because you really don't know what invisible disadvantages they may have.No. We're adults and we should be able to engage without this "all or nothing" thinking. White privilege doesn't mean you don't have a hard life, it means your life isn't hard because you're white. Privilege is the most apt word to describe the benefits attributed to these groups. We shouldn't be framing the terminology around making sure the people who have it easier are comfortable with their circumstance.
posted by FirstMateKate at 6:02 AM on April 15, 2016 [32 favorites]
I'm really not in a position to agree or disagree with that notion, but I've seen it expressed. If you google around it you'll get the general idea.
Technically, yes, since the word was created by Kimberlé Crenshaw to describe how her feminist activism intersected with her black activism, and the specific form of misogyny that black women specifically face-which is now referred to as misgynoir.
Hmm, I guess I'm wrong on that level, although I think as the term is used in the non-technical, but not quite vernacular world of Metafilter, it is applied to white people who are disadvantaged along other axes of privilege pretty regularly. I also believe that the very basic concept of intersectionality (that you can't separate out various oppressive structures when people exist in all of them) will obviously apply to some white people.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 6:06 AM on April 15, 2016 [3 favorites]
Technically, yes, since the word was created by Kimberlé Crenshaw to describe how her feminist activism intersected with her black activism, and the specific form of misogyny that black women specifically face-which is now referred to as misgynoir.
Hmm, I guess I'm wrong on that level, although I think as the term is used in the non-technical, but not quite vernacular world of Metafilter, it is applied to white people who are disadvantaged along other axes of privilege pretty regularly. I also believe that the very basic concept of intersectionality (that you can't separate out various oppressive structures when people exist in all of them) will obviously apply to some white people.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 6:06 AM on April 15, 2016 [3 favorites]
FWIW, griphus, that antisemitic privilege points graphic that was circulating on tumblr was a troll/satire pst.
posted by moonlight on vermont at 6:10 AM on April 15, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by moonlight on vermont at 6:10 AM on April 15, 2016 [3 favorites]
The difference between the academic definition of privilege and the vernacular definition is pretty big.
Yeah, I think that's what's going on here, that the author isn't familiar enough with the academic concept to really grasp the distinction. I get where she's coming from-- I was at my therapist literally last week saying something very like what she says here, that there's one narrative where I grew up very privileged and another where I grew up as an abuse victim-- but I don't conflate that with what "white privilege" means.
That certainly wasn't intended to come off as sarcastic. Only that the writers of these pieces often put their own selves and experience at a forefront that's quite removed from an actual discussion of privilege and instead turn the discussion entirely onto themselves and their feelings on how being called "privileged" is, in some way, wrong or hurtful (as opposed to genuinely exploring the concept in relation to themselves.)
That makes sense, and sorry for my uncharitable reading.
posted by thetortoise at 6:10 AM on April 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
Yeah, I think that's what's going on here, that the author isn't familiar enough with the academic concept to really grasp the distinction. I get where she's coming from-- I was at my therapist literally last week saying something very like what she says here, that there's one narrative where I grew up very privileged and another where I grew up as an abuse victim-- but I don't conflate that with what "white privilege" means.
That certainly wasn't intended to come off as sarcastic. Only that the writers of these pieces often put their own selves and experience at a forefront that's quite removed from an actual discussion of privilege and instead turn the discussion entirely onto themselves and their feelings on how being called "privileged" is, in some way, wrong or hurtful (as opposed to genuinely exploring the concept in relation to themselves.)
That makes sense, and sorry for my uncharitable reading.
posted by thetortoise at 6:10 AM on April 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
Yeah, I think that's what's going on here, that the author isn't familiar enough with the academic concept to really grasp the distinction. I get where she's coming from-- I was at my therapist literally last week saying something very like what she says here, that there's one narrative where I grew up very privileged and another where I grew up as an abuse victim-- but I don't conflate that with what "white privilege" means.
Yeah I got that same sense from how many of her privileges weren't things we typically talk about as "privilege" at all, like the ponies. Like if I were enumerating my privileges, I wouldn't say I'm a white straight ablebodied cis man who grew up with a dog and a creek in the backyard.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 6:13 AM on April 15, 2016 [4 favorites]
Yeah I got that same sense from how many of her privileges weren't things we typically talk about as "privilege" at all, like the ponies. Like if I were enumerating my privileges, I wouldn't say I'm a white straight ablebodied cis man who grew up with a dog and a creek in the backyard.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 6:13 AM on April 15, 2016 [4 favorites]
I remain happy with who and what I am, with or without privilige. If white, I have it. If male, I have it. If above average income, I have it. If reasonably healthy, I have it...I would like to keep it too and unabashed to note that I have more of it than some and less than perhaps others.
posted by Postroad at 6:13 AM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by Postroad at 6:13 AM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
'Privilege' is shorthand for systemic privilege vs. systemic discrimination. People of colour, people of First Nations/American Indian descent, people with certain accents, people who have immigrated, people who are not heterosexual, people who are not cisgendered, people who are not men, etc. All of these people and more face a culture and society that puts barriers in their way. These barriers are predictable, statistical, experienced on a population basis.
The death of one's father is not systemic. The jailing of more than half of the men in your community is systemic. Being punched is not systemic. Domestic violence which is not taken seriously because it is a typical experience for women in your community is systemic. My uncle's suicide was not systemic. Eleven suicides in a day in Attawapiskat is systemic.
posted by sadmadglad at 6:15 AM on April 15, 2016 [85 favorites]
The death of one's father is not systemic. The jailing of more than half of the men in your community is systemic. Being punched is not systemic. Domestic violence which is not taken seriously because it is a typical experience for women in your community is systemic. My uncle's suicide was not systemic. Eleven suicides in a day in Attawapiskat is systemic.
posted by sadmadglad at 6:15 AM on April 15, 2016 [85 favorites]
FWIW, griphus, that antisemitic privilege points graphic that was circulating on tumblr was a troll/satire pst.
welp.
posted by griphus at 6:15 AM on April 15, 2016
welp.
posted by griphus at 6:15 AM on April 15, 2016
I remain happy with who and what I am, with or without privilige. If white, I have it. If male, I have it. If above average income, I have it. If reasonably healthy, I have it...I would like to keep it too...
Bragging about your privileges and declaring you'd like to keep them is a... brash thing to do, seeing as how privileges inherently come at the expense of those who aren't. This thread (or any thread, ever) probably isn't the best place for this.
posted by FirstMateKate at 6:24 AM on April 15, 2016 [18 favorites]
Bragging about your privileges and declaring you'd like to keep them is a... brash thing to do, seeing as how privileges inherently come at the expense of those who aren't. This thread (or any thread, ever) probably isn't the best place for this.
posted by FirstMateKate at 6:24 AM on April 15, 2016 [18 favorites]
I'm not sure why it's so hard to just acknowledge that privilege has had a role in your successes in life. I could document my childhood narrative that while not as bad as hers, was pretty bad. I could do that but it would be dishonest of me to also not document how being an abled straight white guy helped me sail through a lot of crap and fairly easily rise above my background. I'm definitely very proud of where I am compared to where came from but I have no problem saying that a similar journey would have been a hell of a lot harder had I been black or gay or almost anything else than a six foot tall healthy conventionally attractive white guy.
posted by octothorpe at 6:24 AM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by octothorpe at 6:24 AM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
'Privilege' is shorthand for systemic privilege vs. systemic discrimination.
It is for you. I think the author would disagree, as would I. And that's kind of the point. No one gets to claim they have the definitive answer of What Privilege Is, that cannot be challenged. Pieces like this get to try.
posted by corb at 6:32 AM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
It is for you. I think the author would disagree, as would I. And that's kind of the point. No one gets to claim they have the definitive answer of What Privilege Is, that cannot be challenged. Pieces like this get to try.
posted by corb at 6:32 AM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
I think it's normal and healthy when it's done privately or just in the presence of other people who are up for having that conversation with you, and it's irksome and sometimes hurtful when it's done publicly
Yeah i I think this is an important axis of privilege and privilege discourse. God knows how many essays on it from people of color i've see get set upon for speaking publicly in private ways that are truthful but happen to be totally unapologetic to white people and their experiences. Meanwhile how many white people collect respectful nods and plaudits for shoehorning themselves and their experiences into the conversation like this essay.
posted by griphus at 6:38 AM on April 15, 2016 [5 favorites]
Yeah i I think this is an important axis of privilege and privilege discourse. God knows how many essays on it from people of color i've see get set upon for speaking publicly in private ways that are truthful but happen to be totally unapologetic to white people and their experiences. Meanwhile how many white people collect respectful nods and plaudits for shoehorning themselves and their experiences into the conversation like this essay.
posted by griphus at 6:38 AM on April 15, 2016 [5 favorites]
Snickerdoodle, the one magic key I've seen work time and time again for white people who have had rough lives and are deeply hurt by being told that they're "privileged"-- which they understand in the silver spoon sense and take as a slap to the face of all the pain they and their loved ones have endured-- is driving while black. For some reason this, or other widely known racial or sexist injustices, gets people to have that lightbulb moment that the definition of "privilege" has changed from "spoiled", and makes it click for them that when people talk about "white privilege", that's a phrase that translates not to "nothing bad has ever happened to you" but "finally a word for the opposite of systemic racism." Can't count the times I've had or witnessed the "well, of course I've never been pulled over for driving while black, I'm white-- oh. OH. THAT'S what you mean" conversation.
posted by moonlight on vermont at 7:02 AM on April 15, 2016 [30 favorites]
posted by moonlight on vermont at 7:02 AM on April 15, 2016 [30 favorites]
I remain happy with who and what I am, with or without privilige. If white, I have it. If male, I have it. If above average income, I have it. If reasonably healthy, I have it...I would like to keep it too and unabashed to note that I have more of it than some
People are not nearly as mad about you having privilege as you seem to think they are, nor, I think, is there much of a movement to take your privilege away - although I suspect the interpretation depends on your psychological/political orientation; if you view society as a zero-sum situation (as most conservatives seem to), then someone else "gaining" privilege must mean that someone else "loses" privilege; but if you tend towards the more liberal "a rising tide lifts all boats" mindset then people who are currently less privileged gaining more privilege is a net good for society as a whole.
In any case, I also suspect that the first thing people are looking for from those who have privilege is for the privileged to NOT tell them how things aren't so bad, or they just need to stop whining and toughen up, or that they're complaining about something being unfair when life is just unfair too bad so sad. That privilege makes you blind to and ignorant of ways that the less-privileged have had to deal with systemic disadvantages, so telling them how they should feel about the situations they encounter is often or even usually arrogant and insulting.
posted by soundguy99 at 7:14 AM on April 15, 2016 [11 favorites]
People are not nearly as mad about you having privilege as you seem to think they are, nor, I think, is there much of a movement to take your privilege away - although I suspect the interpretation depends on your psychological/political orientation; if you view society as a zero-sum situation (as most conservatives seem to), then someone else "gaining" privilege must mean that someone else "loses" privilege; but if you tend towards the more liberal "a rising tide lifts all boats" mindset then people who are currently less privileged gaining more privilege is a net good for society as a whole.
In any case, I also suspect that the first thing people are looking for from those who have privilege is for the privileged to NOT tell them how things aren't so bad, or they just need to stop whining and toughen up, or that they're complaining about something being unfair when life is just unfair too bad so sad. That privilege makes you blind to and ignorant of ways that the less-privileged have had to deal with systemic disadvantages, so telling them how they should feel about the situations they encounter is often or even usually arrogant and insulting.
posted by soundguy99 at 7:14 AM on April 15, 2016 [11 favorites]
seeing as how privileges inherently come at the expense of those who aren't.
Wait, do you mean they come at the expense of others because the word as defined itself implies that, and if nobody had any of the benefits of what we might now see as a case of privilege, we wouldn't have any good reason to keep using the word, or does the idea assume that power in a society has to be a zero-sum game and it's impossible to even conceive of alternatives that don't grant exclusionary social privilege to some? That latter seems more like the run of the mill neoliberal thinking that promotes and exploits social resentment and the struggle among identity groups as a political control mechanism than like a progressive/leftist idea... If it's just that first, then okay, sure that makes sense, alhough it's tautological.
posted by saulgoodman at 7:15 AM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
Wait, do you mean they come at the expense of others because the word as defined itself implies that, and if nobody had any of the benefits of what we might now see as a case of privilege, we wouldn't have any good reason to keep using the word, or does the idea assume that power in a society has to be a zero-sum game and it's impossible to even conceive of alternatives that don't grant exclusionary social privilege to some? That latter seems more like the run of the mill neoliberal thinking that promotes and exploits social resentment and the struggle among identity groups as a political control mechanism than like a progressive/leftist idea... If it's just that first, then okay, sure that makes sense, alhough it's tautological.
posted by saulgoodman at 7:15 AM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
It is for you. I think the author would disagree, as would I. And that's kind of the point. No one gets to claim they have the definitive answer of What Privilege Is, that cannot be challenged.
Nope. Once again you're doing that conservative thing where you're twisting the liberal/progressive concepts of "the personal is political" and "listening to and believing personal stories is an important aspect of learning about and validating the lives of various marginalized people" and interpreting them to mean "Everyone's opinion is equally valid no matter what."
posted by soundguy99 at 7:20 AM on April 15, 2016 [11 favorites]
Nope. Once again you're doing that conservative thing where you're twisting the liberal/progressive concepts of "the personal is political" and "listening to and believing personal stories is an important aspect of learning about and validating the lives of various marginalized people" and interpreting them to mean "Everyone's opinion is equally valid no matter what."
posted by soundguy99 at 7:20 AM on April 15, 2016 [11 favorites]
I feel dumber for having read that. I feel like the author should speak to her college-age child a bit more about privilege.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:27 AM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:27 AM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
It is for you. I think the author would disagree, as would I. And that's kind of the point. No one gets to claim they have the definitive answer of What Privilege Is, that cannot be challenged. Pieces like this get to try.
If we can't agree on what words and terminology mean, then we can't even have a conversation. Muddying the water by saying "your definition is only personal, and it means something different to me" is a non-defense, and shouldn't be given serious consideration.
Imagine in a court of law, if the first defense against any crime was to quibble over the definition of each term used.
"Privilege" is a well-defined term, and attempting to twist it around does no one a service.
posted by explosion at 7:27 AM on April 15, 2016 [27 favorites]
"Privilege" is a well-defined term, and attempting to twist it around does no one a service.
I beg to differ: Muddying the waters does a service to people attempting to argue in bad faith. It's important to acknowledge that this is the main purpose of claiming definitions are personal as a defense.
posted by I-Write-Essays at 7:36 AM on April 15, 2016 [10 favorites]
I beg to differ: Muddying the waters does a service to people attempting to argue in bad faith. It's important to acknowledge that this is the main purpose of claiming definitions are personal as a defense.
posted by I-Write-Essays at 7:36 AM on April 15, 2016 [10 favorites]
Oh man. I wish that worked, but my mom just tells me that she got pulled over all the time for driving a crappy car, and is convinced that it's class and not race that's the real issue. She still complains about the time she got a ticket for not having my sister in a carseat.
Maybe some of these discussions in the U.S. would work better if we also acknowledged that class is a real thing and there is such a thing as class privilege. Working class whites hate hearing about their white privilege, and the people lecturing them about it are often middle and upper-class whites who aren't willing to acknowledge their own class privileges.
posted by Alluring Mouthbreather at 7:38 AM on April 15, 2016 [41 favorites]
Maybe some of these discussions in the U.S. would work better if we also acknowledged that class is a real thing and there is such a thing as class privilege. Working class whites hate hearing about their white privilege, and the people lecturing them about it are often middle and upper-class whites who aren't willing to acknowledge their own class privileges.
posted by Alluring Mouthbreather at 7:38 AM on April 15, 2016 [41 favorites]
I do not write this to dismiss the pain of others but to embrace it. I can’t know what it is like to be black in a country that seems determined to see black skin as inferior
You know... she needs to learn more about privilege, ironically, to understand why this statement is both super privileged, and really kind of offensive.
I was “helped up” through Harvard, that outrageously moneyed, privileged university that occasionally pays for lucky people like myself.
And I bet nobody told her she stole that spot and that financial aid from someone who deserved it more.
posted by nakedmolerats at 7:43 AM on April 15, 2016 [7 favorites]
You know... she needs to learn more about privilege, ironically, to understand why this statement is both super privileged, and really kind of offensive.
I was “helped up” through Harvard, that outrageously moneyed, privileged university that occasionally pays for lucky people like myself.
And I bet nobody told her she stole that spot and that financial aid from someone who deserved it more.
posted by nakedmolerats at 7:43 AM on April 15, 2016 [7 favorites]
saulgoodman, forgive me because I can't parse your either-or, but basically it boils down to the fact that white people can't have it easier without taking opportunities from minorities. I guess this fits under your "definition" take on my comment- if everyone has the exact same playing field, then it's not really a "privilege".
As an example- a white, underqualified applicant getting hired over a black applicant that's suited better for the position. That's a privilege that white people have, and without disadvantaging mionorities we would not be afforded it.
This is what we mean when we talk about privilege, and anyone saying they want to hold onto them is gross.
posted by FirstMateKate at 7:47 AM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
As an example- a white, underqualified applicant getting hired over a black applicant that's suited better for the position. That's a privilege that white people have, and without disadvantaging mionorities we would not be afforded it.
This is what we mean when we talk about privilege, and anyone saying they want to hold onto them is gross.
posted by FirstMateKate at 7:47 AM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
I think this distinction between broad strokes and individual experiences works along many axes.
Growing up as a poor, Black child puts me quite low on a simplistic accounting of privilege. In reality, our poverty was that of grad student parents trying to make a stipend stretch rather than inescapable quicksand and my black experience is that of being from an immigrant family for whom racism is an unpleasant intrusion rather than the permanent background noise it is for African-Americans. My simplistic demographic factors mask the enormous wealth of cultural capital that I'm blessed with. (cf McDonalds employee vs adjunct professor)
The violence in the system is real but I've only rarely been given a peek behind the curtain.
posted by Octaviuz at 7:47 AM on April 15, 2016 [8 favorites]
Growing up as a poor, Black child puts me quite low on a simplistic accounting of privilege. In reality, our poverty was that of grad student parents trying to make a stipend stretch rather than inescapable quicksand and my black experience is that of being from an immigrant family for whom racism is an unpleasant intrusion rather than the permanent background noise it is for African-Americans. My simplistic demographic factors mask the enormous wealth of cultural capital that I'm blessed with. (cf McDonalds employee vs adjunct professor)
The violence in the system is real but I've only rarely been given a peek behind the curtain.
posted by Octaviuz at 7:47 AM on April 15, 2016 [8 favorites]
Maybe some of these discussions in the U.S. would work better if we also acknowledged that class is a real thing and there is such a thing as class privilege. Working class whites hate hearing about their white privilege, and the people lecturing them about it are often middle and upper-class whites who aren't willing to acknowledge their own class privileges.
Bang on. I think what some of the social psych research is saying, though (and what you often hear loud and clear in comments sections of papers) is that many working class people find the very idea of class-based systematic disadvantage offensive, it harms their belief in a just world and sense of personal agency. (I can link to some stuff if/when I can if/when anyone wants that.)
posted by cotton dress sock at 7:52 AM on April 15, 2016 [10 favorites]
Bang on. I think what some of the social psych research is saying, though (and what you often hear loud and clear in comments sections of papers) is that many working class people find the very idea of class-based systematic disadvantage offensive, it harms their belief in a just world and sense of personal agency. (I can link to some stuff if/when I can if/when anyone wants that.)
posted by cotton dress sock at 7:52 AM on April 15, 2016 [10 favorites]
"I wasn’t allowed to go to school because there was no kindergarten available."
I'm not sure the word "allowed" means what she seems to think it means. It's like saying, "I'm not allowed to eat Raisin Bran because the store was all out of it."
posted by The Underpants Monster at 8:00 AM on April 15, 2016 [3 favorites]
I'm not sure the word "allowed" means what she seems to think it means. It's like saying, "I'm not allowed to eat Raisin Bran because the store was all out of it."
posted by The Underpants Monster at 8:00 AM on April 15, 2016 [3 favorites]
My "elevator pitch" explanation for privilege is "the benefit of the doubt". When interacting with strangers, be they citizens or officials, do you expect them to trust you? Yeah, a large portion of the population are met with distrust from the get-go, especially if they are dressed any less than impeccably.
posted by domo at 8:01 AM on April 15, 2016 [9 favorites]
posted by domo at 8:01 AM on April 15, 2016 [9 favorites]
also, seems like the idea of class is just taboo in the US. meritocracy, american exceptionalism, freedom, etc etc
posted by cotton dress sock at 8:03 AM on April 15, 2016 [6 favorites]
posted by cotton dress sock at 8:03 AM on April 15, 2016 [6 favorites]
The article reads like she hasn't yet heard of the word "intersectionality", the fact that a person can be privileged on some axes and disadvantaged on others.
Also, the discussion continues at Marginal Revolution. The comments are ... comment section.
posted by theorique at 8:08 AM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
Also, the discussion continues at Marginal Revolution. The comments are ... comment section.
posted by theorique at 8:08 AM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
Maybe some of these discussions in the U.S. would work better if we also acknowledged that class is a real thing and there is such a thing as class privilege. Working class whites hate hearing about their white privilege, and the people lecturing them about it are often middle and upper-class whites who aren't willing to acknowledge their own class privileges.
Very much this.
posted by Drinky Die at 8:09 AM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
Very much this.
posted by Drinky Die at 8:09 AM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
Maybe some of these discussions in the U.S. would work better if we also acknowledged that class is a real thing and there is such a thing as class privilege. Working class whites hate hearing about their white privilege, and the people lecturing them about it are often middle and upper-class whites who aren't willing to acknowledge their own class privileges.
But it's hard to have a conversation with some white working class folks who tell you that no one ever gave them a hand and they always worked for a living and they pulled themselves up by the bootstraps, etc when they refuse to acknowledge that they already had a leg up on the black working class folks in the same position.
They want to credit hard work and determination with their success rather than a unlevel playing field. And when efforts are made to level that playing field they complain that it's unfair. When they can't succeed on the more level playing field then they want to "Make America Great Again."
posted by teleri025 at 8:43 AM on April 15, 2016 [12 favorites]
But it's hard to have a conversation with some white working class folks who tell you that no one ever gave them a hand and they always worked for a living and they pulled themselves up by the bootstraps, etc when they refuse to acknowledge that they already had a leg up on the black working class folks in the same position.
They want to credit hard work and determination with their success rather than a unlevel playing field. And when efforts are made to level that playing field they complain that it's unfair. When they can't succeed on the more level playing field then they want to "Make America Great Again."
posted by teleri025 at 8:43 AM on April 15, 2016 [12 favorites]
As an example- a white, underqualified applicant getting hired over a black applicant that's suited better for the position.
That's an example of people playing the game as the rules have been defined by the powerful--competition among groups to gain benefit at the expense of others. I disagree that it has to work this way. The reality is, there are always going to be lots of candidates equally qualified for any particular job. It's the artificial scarcities that the powerful actively encourage and promote through their beliefs about the world, keeping themselves in positions of dominance and control in the process, that make it seem like every gain has to come at someone else's expense. That's not reality, it's the system of values promoted by the powerful, accepted as common sense. It's what keeps people fighting amongst themselves and divided while the worst of the wealthy and powerful keep consolidating their power. Scarcity of opportunity isn't inevitable, it's a consequence of the structure of our economic and political systems that many powerful people in America consider virtuous for puritanical reasons that have almost nothing to do with economic or material necessity, and everything to do with satisfying the powerful's egocentric need to believe any world that puts them in charge and let's them achieve their goals while others founder and fail must be fair and just despite the contradictory evidence.
posted by saulgoodman at 8:58 AM on April 15, 2016 [5 favorites]
That's an example of people playing the game as the rules have been defined by the powerful--competition among groups to gain benefit at the expense of others. I disagree that it has to work this way. The reality is, there are always going to be lots of candidates equally qualified for any particular job. It's the artificial scarcities that the powerful actively encourage and promote through their beliefs about the world, keeping themselves in positions of dominance and control in the process, that make it seem like every gain has to come at someone else's expense. That's not reality, it's the system of values promoted by the powerful, accepted as common sense. It's what keeps people fighting amongst themselves and divided while the worst of the wealthy and powerful keep consolidating their power. Scarcity of opportunity isn't inevitable, it's a consequence of the structure of our economic and political systems that many powerful people in America consider virtuous for puritanical reasons that have almost nothing to do with economic or material necessity, and everything to do with satisfying the powerful's egocentric need to believe any world that puts them in charge and let's them achieve their goals while others founder and fail must be fair and just despite the contradictory evidence.
posted by saulgoodman at 8:58 AM on April 15, 2016 [5 favorites]
saulgoodman, forgive me because I can't parse your either-or, but basically it boils down to the fact that white people can't have it easier without taking opportunities from minorities.
FirstMateKate, though white people can't have it easier (comparitively) unless others have it harder, I don't think it's the case that the benefits identified as "white privilege" necessarily come at the expense of others.. Let's take a look at some examples from Peggy McIntosh's well-known, "Unpacking the Invisible Backpack" essay.
Among the examples of white privilege she gives is If I should need to move, I can be pretty sure of renting
or purchasing housing in an area which I can afford and in which I would want to live.
I don't see any reason that couldn't continue to be true for white people and be true for others as well.
Also I can go into a music shop and count on finding the music of my race represented, into a supermarket and find the staple foods which fit with my cultural traditions, into a hairdresser’s shop and find someone who can cut my hair
Making those things true for people of color wouldn't mean they were no longer true for whites.
As saul goodman points out, they would no longer be called privilege, because the term is applied precisely because these things are available routinely to some and not to others. But the social assets described would still be worthwhile, even if they were not restricted on the basis of race. I don't think your claim that privilege must come at the expense of others would apply to things like this, or many other similar experiences that McIntosh and others have identified as examples of white privilege.
posted by layceepee at 9:03 AM on April 15, 2016 [6 favorites]
FirstMateKate, though white people can't have it easier (comparitively) unless others have it harder, I don't think it's the case that the benefits identified as "white privilege" necessarily come at the expense of others.. Let's take a look at some examples from Peggy McIntosh's well-known, "Unpacking the Invisible Backpack" essay.
Among the examples of white privilege she gives is If I should need to move, I can be pretty sure of renting
or purchasing housing in an area which I can afford and in which I would want to live.
I don't see any reason that couldn't continue to be true for white people and be true for others as well.
Also I can go into a music shop and count on finding the music of my race represented, into a supermarket and find the staple foods which fit with my cultural traditions, into a hairdresser’s shop and find someone who can cut my hair
Making those things true for people of color wouldn't mean they were no longer true for whites.
As saul goodman points out, they would no longer be called privilege, because the term is applied precisely because these things are available routinely to some and not to others. But the social assets described would still be worthwhile, even if they were not restricted on the basis of race. I don't think your claim that privilege must come at the expense of others would apply to things like this, or many other similar experiences that McIntosh and others have identified as examples of white privilege.
posted by layceepee at 9:03 AM on April 15, 2016 [6 favorites]
And when efforts are made to level that playing field they complain that it's unfair. When they can't succeed on the more level playing field then they want to "Make America Great Again."
I mean the thing is that levelling the playing field, at least in some of the ways it's being done now (i.e. in a very zero-sum manner, i.e. with effective corporation-states buying the cheapest labour possible, and steamrolling over local labour laws) can't help but engender resentment. Like I think it's fair enough to be angry about having crappy or no living-wage work opportunities. Or about being stuck with 60 hour weeks to compensate for understaffing when the "levelling" isn't being pursued (and living in fear of offending the wrong person / having to become an expert in office politics/personal branding etc). Totally misdirected, though.
posted by cotton dress sock at 9:07 AM on April 15, 2016 [5 favorites]
I mean the thing is that levelling the playing field, at least in some of the ways it's being done now (i.e. in a very zero-sum manner, i.e. with effective corporation-states buying the cheapest labour possible, and steamrolling over local labour laws) can't help but engender resentment. Like I think it's fair enough to be angry about having crappy or no living-wage work opportunities. Or about being stuck with 60 hour weeks to compensate for understaffing when the "levelling" isn't being pursued (and living in fear of offending the wrong person / having to become an expert in office politics/personal branding etc). Totally misdirected, though.
posted by cotton dress sock at 9:07 AM on April 15, 2016 [5 favorites]
privileges inherently come at the expense of those who aren't.
That sort of zero sum view is both odd and demonstrably false. An additional black person isn't searched just because I'm not. I'm not economically better off because others are worse off. To the contrary, income inequality is a drag on the economy.
posted by jpe at 9:11 AM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
That sort of zero sum view is both odd and demonstrably false. An additional black person isn't searched just because I'm not. I'm not economically better off because others are worse off. To the contrary, income inequality is a drag on the economy.
posted by jpe at 9:11 AM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
There was a play called Good People, whose primary characters are Mike and Margie.
The play is about a lot of things, but one plot line is how Mike and Margie both grew up in South Boston. Mike became a doctor and moved away to a more affluent neighbourhood. Margie still lives in Southie and struggles to make ends meet.
At one pont Margie tries to convince Mike of how easy his life is, how lucky he was to get out. Mike refuses to acknowledge his luck, always whining about "how hard he had to work" to get where he is.
Even as a more thoughtful person, it still took me a while to process the message. So I don't expect most privileged people to get it.
In my opinion, privilege doesn't mean not having to working hard. Privilege means that you'll get rewarded appropriately, reliably, and predictably for working hard.
posted by bitteroldman at 9:12 AM on April 15, 2016 [13 favorites]
The play is about a lot of things, but one plot line is how Mike and Margie both grew up in South Boston. Mike became a doctor and moved away to a more affluent neighbourhood. Margie still lives in Southie and struggles to make ends meet.
At one pont Margie tries to convince Mike of how easy his life is, how lucky he was to get out. Mike refuses to acknowledge his luck, always whining about "how hard he had to work" to get where he is.
Even as a more thoughtful person, it still took me a while to process the message. So I don't expect most privileged people to get it.
In my opinion, privilege doesn't mean not having to working hard. Privilege means that you'll get rewarded appropriately, reliably, and predictably for working hard.
posted by bitteroldman at 9:12 AM on April 15, 2016 [13 favorites]
That's an example of people playing the game as the rules have been defined by the powerful--competition among groups to gain benefit at the expense of others. I disagree that it has to work this way.
Yes, and the fact that the rules of the powerful consistently benefit white people mean that is a privilege that whites are afforded. I'm not sure what you're trying to say? It's not white privilege because powerful white people make it happen?
And nothing in any of my statements impugned that it had to be this way. It feels like you're reading in to what I'm saying and arguing against points I am not making.
posted by FirstMateKate at 9:12 AM on April 15, 2016
Yes, and the fact that the rules of the powerful consistently benefit white people mean that is a privilege that whites are afforded. I'm not sure what you're trying to say? It's not white privilege because powerful white people make it happen?
And nothing in any of my statements impugned that it had to be this way. It feels like you're reading in to what I'm saying and arguing against points I am not making.
posted by FirstMateKate at 9:12 AM on April 15, 2016
The older I get, the more I realize my life has been a bit like bumper bowling.
posted by grumpybear69 at 9:13 AM on April 15, 2016 [8 favorites]
posted by grumpybear69 at 9:13 AM on April 15, 2016 [8 favorites]
Wow, okay now there's some weird pile on because I don't think people should say "I have white privilege and I want to keep it". And my point is somehow being stretched to debate whether or not privilege is a zero-sum game( a point I never made an assertion on). To me its coming off as people trying to explain how whites can keep some privileges without hurting anyone, and frankly I don't really want to be a part of that discussion anymore.
posted by FirstMateKate at 9:17 AM on April 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by FirstMateKate at 9:17 AM on April 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
But it's hard to have a conversation with some white working class folks who tell you that no one ever gave them a hand and they always worked for a living and they pulled themselves up by the bootstraps, etc when they refuse to acknowledge that they already had a leg up on the black working class folks in the same position.
I would imagine it is hard to have that conversation, because it allows one to dismiss any white working class person's achievement without knowing anything about that person at all. There's a word for that already. I've seen what happens when a person's effort and ability is minimized. I don't think white working class folks like it any better.
I think the concept of privilege is a useful one, but thrown around sloppily enough that it's often a marker for oversimplification.
posted by 2N2222 at 9:21 AM on April 15, 2016 [7 favorites]
It's not white privilege because powerful white people make it happen?
No, not at all. But the whole idea of privilege is a necessary part of the system that benefits whites at the expense of other groups and that creates systemic injustice. Plantation owners were known to encourage jealousies and rivalries among slaves under their control to keep them from organizing; prison wardens have been known to use similar tactics, along racial identity lines, to minimize the risk of prison riots organizing. Privilege doesn't have to exist at all, and buying into the idea that gain has to come at someone else's expense supports the arguments that keep poor whites voting in ways that don't advance racial justice or even their own interests.
I didn't have a point to start with; I was just hoping to understand the original comment better. Now I guess I do, so thanks for explaining.
posted by saulgoodman at 9:35 AM on April 15, 2016 [4 favorites]
No, not at all. But the whole idea of privilege is a necessary part of the system that benefits whites at the expense of other groups and that creates systemic injustice. Plantation owners were known to encourage jealousies and rivalries among slaves under their control to keep them from organizing; prison wardens have been known to use similar tactics, along racial identity lines, to minimize the risk of prison riots organizing. Privilege doesn't have to exist at all, and buying into the idea that gain has to come at someone else's expense supports the arguments that keep poor whites voting in ways that don't advance racial justice or even their own interests.
I didn't have a point to start with; I was just hoping to understand the original comment better. Now I guess I do, so thanks for explaining.
posted by saulgoodman at 9:35 AM on April 15, 2016 [4 favorites]
There's a difference between dismissing any or all achievements, and saying that they were likely easier for you in some ways because of eg your race. No one is saying achievement is either 100% privilege or 100% your own work.
Statistics don't work on an individual level. We can't assess whether a randomly chosen black working class person has fared better than a white working class person. We can look at thousands of people, over time, and see that statistically, white working class people tend to fare better.
posted by nakedmolerats at 9:41 AM on April 15, 2016 [4 favorites]
Statistics don't work on an individual level. We can't assess whether a randomly chosen black working class person has fared better than a white working class person. We can look at thousands of people, over time, and see that statistically, white working class people tend to fare better.
posted by nakedmolerats at 9:41 AM on April 15, 2016 [4 favorites]
If you're versed in the vocabulary and familiar with the arguments privilege as a word is appropriate and useful. If you are trying to explain to other people, especially those who you would consider to have more privileges its a pretty inflammatory word whose incindiary quality is not ameliorated by telling people they are ignorant and misusing the word. I figure you have to expect that you will get articles like this one if that's the word you use.
posted by Pembquist at 9:47 AM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by Pembquist at 9:47 AM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
I think trauma and privilege are best thought of separately and then they overlap
posted by ClaudiaCenter at 9:50 AM on April 15, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by ClaudiaCenter at 9:50 AM on April 15, 2016 [3 favorites]
If we can't agree on what words and terminology mean, then we can't even have a conversation. Muddying the water by saying "your definition is only personal, and it means something different to me" is a non-defense, and shouldn't be given serious consideration.
Let me, in turn, explain why it should.
I have the advantage of having been an activist on a very serious scale for several years, to the point of having media and branding consultants which were hired on a permanent basis, who gave a lot of their advice as a result of social science surveys. I also have the advantage of having majored in social science. So when I say that words matter, and definitions matter, it's not from the perspective of some asshole just trying to blow smoke into an argument, but rather from the perspective of someone who understands that how you define words, and who gets to define words, is itself political.
What is the definition of a communist? Who gets to define that, the communists, or their political enemies? Is that word a good word with a good connotation or a bad word with a bad connotation? Does Joseph McCarthy get to define it, or Karl Marx? The answer has as much to do with the acceptance of the political philosophy as the political philosophy itself. Is something a "settlement", or an "occupation"?
When someone says, "This word means something different to me", what they are often saying is, "I disagree with the connotations and political meaning you are trying to place on this word." It's not just nitpicking. It's a real statement with real political consequences.
When it comes to privilege, there are big, political answers to how we define the word. Is privilege individual, or systemic? That question, and the answer to that question, in turn informs whether we think it's something that should be changed, and if so, how we work to change it. If privilege is individual, then it's impossible to fully eradicate, and so the prioritization of working on it is lowered. If privilege is systemic, then if we fix it, systemic change may be required.
Insisting that the discussion only take place around your definition of the word and the condition from the beginning is insisting that your political worldview be given, immediately, unquestioning dominance. And maybe that's what you mean to be insisting - but I think it's important to be aware of if maybe you don't.
posted by corb at 11:13 AM on April 15, 2016 [13 favorites]
Let me, in turn, explain why it should.
I have the advantage of having been an activist on a very serious scale for several years, to the point of having media and branding consultants which were hired on a permanent basis, who gave a lot of their advice as a result of social science surveys. I also have the advantage of having majored in social science. So when I say that words matter, and definitions matter, it's not from the perspective of some asshole just trying to blow smoke into an argument, but rather from the perspective of someone who understands that how you define words, and who gets to define words, is itself political.
What is the definition of a communist? Who gets to define that, the communists, or their political enemies? Is that word a good word with a good connotation or a bad word with a bad connotation? Does Joseph McCarthy get to define it, or Karl Marx? The answer has as much to do with the acceptance of the political philosophy as the political philosophy itself. Is something a "settlement", or an "occupation"?
When someone says, "This word means something different to me", what they are often saying is, "I disagree with the connotations and political meaning you are trying to place on this word." It's not just nitpicking. It's a real statement with real political consequences.
When it comes to privilege, there are big, political answers to how we define the word. Is privilege individual, or systemic? That question, and the answer to that question, in turn informs whether we think it's something that should be changed, and if so, how we work to change it. If privilege is individual, then it's impossible to fully eradicate, and so the prioritization of working on it is lowered. If privilege is systemic, then if we fix it, systemic change may be required.
Insisting that the discussion only take place around your definition of the word and the condition from the beginning is insisting that your political worldview be given, immediately, unquestioning dominance. And maybe that's what you mean to be insisting - but I think it's important to be aware of if maybe you don't.
posted by corb at 11:13 AM on April 15, 2016 [13 favorites]
That's sort of what this FPP illustrates, innit? That there's people who won't engage with "privilege" as a referent to an absence of systemic discrimination along some particular axis because they had it hard at some point in their life.
What I am doubtful of is that any significant number of people who deny the reality of the concept behind the word would come around if a different word was substituted.
posted by prize bull octorok at 11:22 AM on April 15, 2016 [7 favorites]
What I am doubtful of is that any significant number of people who deny the reality of the concept behind the word would come around if a different word was substituted.
posted by prize bull octorok at 11:22 AM on April 15, 2016 [7 favorites]
a.) My intuitive understanding has long been that you can simultaneously be on the "plus" side of privilege in one way and on the "minus" side in another. And it's context-dependent, though "the whole world on average" is a context in itself. I mean, that seems pretty obvious. And yeah, there's no formula that will give you a definitive answer to which of any two people is advantaged overall. Which is fine because isn't the point of the whole "invisible knapsack" exercise to reflect upon one's own unearned advantages?
b.) There are definitely people who will act as if there's a formula that lets them say "you have privilege, you don't, you do" with minimal context which doesn't seem very helpful. If you put that in context it becomes more meaningful - "as a white person you don't know what it's like to be a black person" is almost certainly true.
posted by atoxyl at 11:44 AM on April 15, 2016 [3 favorites]
b.) There are definitely people who will act as if there's a formula that lets them say "you have privilege, you don't, you do" with minimal context which doesn't seem very helpful. If you put that in context it becomes more meaningful - "as a white person you don't know what it's like to be a black person" is almost certainly true.
posted by atoxyl at 11:44 AM on April 15, 2016 [3 favorites]
Privilege simply means that under the exact same set of circumstances you’re in, life would be harder without your privilege
This definition is beautifully mathematical, but means that intersectionality is like partial differential equations, not simple addition.
That won't make it easier to explain though. ( PDEs describe how multiple variables affect each other as complicatedly as you like, and they describe beautiful natural phenomena, but they are a real bear to learn both in gestalt and in detail.)
posted by clew at 12:19 PM on April 15, 2016
This definition is beautifully mathematical, but means that intersectionality is like partial differential equations, not simple addition.
That won't make it easier to explain though. ( PDEs describe how multiple variables affect each other as complicatedly as you like, and they describe beautiful natural phenomena, but they are a real bear to learn both in gestalt and in detail.)
posted by clew at 12:19 PM on April 15, 2016
My intuitive understanding has long been that you can simultaneously be on the "plus" side of privilege in one way and on the "minus" side in another.
That's the meaning of "intersectionality" - i.e. that privileges and/or oppressions along different axes interact with each other - they don't exist in isolation.
posted by theorique at 12:20 PM on April 15, 2016
That's the meaning of "intersectionality" - i.e. that privileges and/or oppressions along different axes interact with each other - they don't exist in isolation.
posted by theorique at 12:20 PM on April 15, 2016
When someone says, "This word means something different to me", what they are often saying is, "I disagree with the connotations and political meaning you are trying to place on this word." It's not just nitpicking. It's a real statement with real political consequences.
This reminds me of people who insist that they're "humanists" (or "egalitarians" or somesuch), and not "feminists", because "feminism" is outdated/unnecessary/misandrist whatever. Or that they're colour-blind "humanists" because "race shouldn't matter" or something. I mean yeah, they can disagree that sexism and racism exist, and that there's a need for activism on either score, just like they can believe whatever they want about the moon landing, but I don't have to listen or pretend like it's a point of view with validity.
posted by cotton dress sock at 12:23 PM on April 15, 2016 [3 favorites]
This reminds me of people who insist that they're "humanists" (or "egalitarians" or somesuch), and not "feminists", because "feminism" is outdated/unnecessary/misandrist whatever. Or that they're colour-blind "humanists" because "race shouldn't matter" or something. I mean yeah, they can disagree that sexism and racism exist, and that there's a need for activism on either score, just like they can believe whatever they want about the moon landing, but I don't have to listen or pretend like it's a point of view with validity.
posted by cotton dress sock at 12:23 PM on April 15, 2016 [3 favorites]
I would imagine it is hard to have that conversation, because it allows one to dismiss any white working class person's achievement without knowing anything about that person at all. There's a word for that already. I've seen what happens when a person's effort and ability is minimized. I don't think white working class folks like it any better.
I think the concept of privilege is a useful one, but thrown around sloppily enough that it's often a marker for oversimplification.
And yet, that same working class white person who thinks that welfare is a sin and "there's no such thing as a free lunch." is assuming that everyone who needs social assistance is only poor or down and out because they don't work hard enough.
The idea that you start out level and the only reason why [insert minority here] is on welfare or takes government entitlements is because they don't want to work is patently false. When you add in the baggage of the average white person saying, "I was born poor and now I'm a well-to-do business man, therefore anyone can do what I've done.", it can be like talking to a wall.
Trust me, I'm a well to do white girl who has worked moderately hard for where I am. I understand that the privilege accorded to me by my skin tone and my visual ability to blend in with the majority has been a great boon to my success. I could easily become deluded that the work that I have legitimately done is all that is the source of my success. But I understand that nobody exists in a vacuum and we all stand on the shoulders of giants. All I'm asking is for my fellow white folks to expand their views a bit and realize that just because you work hard and overcome some shit, you aren't guaranteed pot of gold. Just because you can't see where you benefited from things you didn't realize where happening, you shouldn't discount them. Most importantly, you shouldn't tell other people who DO NOT have those hidden benefits working for them that this whole thing is easy and they just aren't trying hard enough.
posted by teleri025 at 12:45 PM on April 15, 2016 [6 favorites]
I think the concept of privilege is a useful one, but thrown around sloppily enough that it's often a marker for oversimplification.
And yet, that same working class white person who thinks that welfare is a sin and "there's no such thing as a free lunch." is assuming that everyone who needs social assistance is only poor or down and out because they don't work hard enough.
The idea that you start out level and the only reason why [insert minority here] is on welfare or takes government entitlements is because they don't want to work is patently false. When you add in the baggage of the average white person saying, "I was born poor and now I'm a well-to-do business man, therefore anyone can do what I've done.", it can be like talking to a wall.
Trust me, I'm a well to do white girl who has worked moderately hard for where I am. I understand that the privilege accorded to me by my skin tone and my visual ability to blend in with the majority has been a great boon to my success. I could easily become deluded that the work that I have legitimately done is all that is the source of my success. But I understand that nobody exists in a vacuum and we all stand on the shoulders of giants. All I'm asking is for my fellow white folks to expand their views a bit and realize that just because you work hard and overcome some shit, you aren't guaranteed pot of gold. Just because you can't see where you benefited from things you didn't realize where happening, you shouldn't discount them. Most importantly, you shouldn't tell other people who DO NOT have those hidden benefits working for them that this whole thing is easy and they just aren't trying hard enough.
posted by teleri025 at 12:45 PM on April 15, 2016 [6 favorites]
Can we do this conversation without caricaturing the views and experiences of white poor and working-class people? I mean, maybe not, but I would like to try.
posted by thetortoise at 1:00 PM on April 15, 2016 [11 favorites]
posted by thetortoise at 1:00 PM on April 15, 2016 [11 favorites]
Yeah, I was rude there, thetortoise. Good call, thanks, sorry.
posted by cotton dress sock at 1:02 PM on April 15, 2016
posted by cotton dress sock at 1:02 PM on April 15, 2016
When thinking about my own privilege, the shitheads below, assholes above picture comes to mind. It's always easier for me to see the assholes above, the people who are shitting on me. Even if my particular intersection of race/class/colonial history places me in a more privileged position than 90% of the planet, the shit coming down from the 10% who are above me is what gets most of my attention.
It takes work to see the shit I'm producing. It feels like a natural function.
posted by clawsoon at 1:14 PM on April 15, 2016 [3 favorites]
It takes work to see the shit I'm producing. It feels like a natural function.
posted by clawsoon at 1:14 PM on April 15, 2016 [3 favorites]
I just feel like I've seen a lot of "white working-class people: why they can't think critically and they all vote for Trump" on the site, which already skews pretty affluent, lately and think this conversation about racism and privilege might be better without it. Just another thing to consider; please carry on.
posted by thetortoise at 1:18 PM on April 15, 2016 [12 favorites]
posted by thetortoise at 1:18 PM on April 15, 2016 [12 favorites]
"Privilege simply means that under the exact same set of circumstances you’re in, life would be harder without your privilege"
This definition is beautifully mathematical, but means that intersectionality is like partial differential equations, not simple addition.
This reads like you're turning the lives of marginalized people into an equation to be solved.
posted by Monochrome at 1:22 PM on April 15, 2016
This definition is beautifully mathematical, but means that intersectionality is like partial differential equations, not simple addition.
This reads like you're turning the lives of marginalized people into an equation to be solved.
posted by Monochrome at 1:22 PM on April 15, 2016
Yeah. TBH, though. Completely honest. I can't help but see the kinds of views I described (probably uncharitably!) as worthy of contempt. At the same time that I'm mindful of the reasons they (maybe) exist (inasmuch as they do) and am sympathetic to people suffering from those same reasons, and am aware of the strength of their pull. Say with the anti-feminist humanist ladies - tbch again, I feel like they'll eventually experience enough to see what everyone's talking about (a lot of them are young). Obnoxious, absolutely. Can't say I know a way to engage with that kind of perspective without being dishonest and mealy-mouthed or condescending. (I definitely lack finesse, often. Not excusing it.)
posted by cotton dress sock at 1:23 PM on April 15, 2016
posted by cotton dress sock at 1:23 PM on April 15, 2016
I'm interested in figuring out how to reach the working class that has not found success, which is much more common than founding a business and making it to a middle class level of wealth. It's more confusing to me that a group that is struggling can't see the system is aligned against them than that individuals who are doing well can't see their own advantages. I don't know how to convince someone about systemic issues other people are facing when they often deny the roadblocks that are in their own way exist.
They've seen hard work and education isn't enough to get ahead with their own eyes, but they put the blame in all the wrong places for various reasons. I think some of the rejection for systemic explanations for their problems is explainable by something close to what Obama was talking about with his "bitter clinging"comments. But I think it's more about holding on to a sense of pride and individuality. "My life may be in the ditch, but at least I drove myself here," is an attitude that lets one retain a sense of personal control, and it can be scary to admit that control doesn't really exist. It's scary to realize the system you were born into is stacked against you and the whims of chance play a massive role in your life. It's scary to realize a lot of what you were told when you were young by people you trusted is, despite their often very sincere beliefs, simply not true.
It may just take time for that sort of thinking to go to the wayside. Parents and teachers have to stop spreading the myths. I think the modern working class experience will inevitably lead them in that direction eventually. When social mobility becomes less and less common, people will stop believing in it and hopefully start to look for the real sources of their problems and people will start to think more positively and collectively instead of slicing and dicing who is and is not deserving of a helping hand when they need it.
posted by Drinky Die at 1:42 PM on April 15, 2016 [5 favorites]
They've seen hard work and education isn't enough to get ahead with their own eyes, but they put the blame in all the wrong places for various reasons. I think some of the rejection for systemic explanations for their problems is explainable by something close to what Obama was talking about with his "bitter clinging"comments. But I think it's more about holding on to a sense of pride and individuality. "My life may be in the ditch, but at least I drove myself here," is an attitude that lets one retain a sense of personal control, and it can be scary to admit that control doesn't really exist. It's scary to realize the system you were born into is stacked against you and the whims of chance play a massive role in your life. It's scary to realize a lot of what you were told when you were young by people you trusted is, despite their often very sincere beliefs, simply not true.
It may just take time for that sort of thinking to go to the wayside. Parents and teachers have to stop spreading the myths. I think the modern working class experience will inevitably lead them in that direction eventually. When social mobility becomes less and less common, people will stop believing in it and hopefully start to look for the real sources of their problems and people will start to think more positively and collectively instead of slicing and dicing who is and is not deserving of a helping hand when they need it.
posted by Drinky Die at 1:42 PM on April 15, 2016 [5 favorites]
It's more confusing to me that a group that is struggling can't see the system is aligned against them than that individuals who are doing well can't see their own advantages.
I think, not for the first time, that people have a hard time with this because when they try to complain about the ways that their lives are becoming systemically harder and worse, they are told to shut up, that these things don't exist and they can't and shouldn't talk about it. This builds nothing but resentment, where people don't want to talk about their problems because they feel no one wants to listen.
They've seen hard work and education isn't enough to get ahead with their own eyes, but they put the blame in all the wrong places for various reasons.
Like this. For the white working class, hard work and education used to be enough to get ahead, and now it's not for a lot of reasons, some of which is that the benefits of that were taken from them. The concept of disparate impact has taken away a lot of the benefits education used to grant, for example.
posted by corb at 1:48 PM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
I think, not for the first time, that people have a hard time with this because when they try to complain about the ways that their lives are becoming systemically harder and worse, they are told to shut up, that these things don't exist and they can't and shouldn't talk about it. This builds nothing but resentment, where people don't want to talk about their problems because they feel no one wants to listen.
They've seen hard work and education isn't enough to get ahead with their own eyes, but they put the blame in all the wrong places for various reasons.
Like this. For the white working class, hard work and education used to be enough to get ahead, and now it's not for a lot of reasons, some of which is that the benefits of that were taken from them. The concept of disparate impact has taken away a lot of the benefits education used to grant, for example.
posted by corb at 1:48 PM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
The concept of disparate impact has taken away a lot of the benefits education used to grant, for example.
This is a pretty big [citation needed] for me. Whatever minuscule effect anti-discrimination laws might have on the value education has for the white working class is impossibly small next to the defunding of state higher education systems, the skyrocketing cost of college, and the scam of for-profit colleges. You might as well be telling the working class to blame the actual boogeyman.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 2:00 PM on April 15, 2016 [11 favorites]
This is a pretty big [citation needed] for me. Whatever minuscule effect anti-discrimination laws might have on the value education has for the white working class is impossibly small next to the defunding of state higher education systems, the skyrocketing cost of college, and the scam of for-profit colleges. You might as well be telling the working class to blame the actual boogeyman.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 2:00 PM on April 15, 2016 [11 favorites]
Sure, though it might be best to clarify that I'm actually not talking about college there, but rather things like "has a high school degree", which I think is the single biggest factor on Joe with a high school degree not seeming to matter much anymore. When employers could select for every job on the basis of things like "do you have a high school degree?" it became much easier for white, otherwise unskilled working class men to get jobs. The EEOC has statistics that around the time of the Griggs decision, nearly three times as many white men had graduated from high school as black men, for example, and that when standardized tests were involved, white men passed the tests a full ten times as often as black men.
Now it is completely fair to argue that the education wasn't necessary for them to perform the job, and it was just something the employer liked rather than the employer needed, and that could be a long, long conversation. But in real effects, "just being an average white guy who passed high school" became a lot less employable without these boosts.
posted by corb at 2:21 PM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
Now it is completely fair to argue that the education wasn't necessary for them to perform the job, and it was just something the employer liked rather than the employer needed, and that could be a long, long conversation. But in real effects, "just being an average white guy who passed high school" became a lot less employable without these boosts.
posted by corb at 2:21 PM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
Except that the story since 1971, isn't one of employers eliminating superfluous high school educational requirements, so you've still not presented an argument based in fact. More jobs than ever require education; something like ten percent of jobs are available to people who didn't graduate high school, I think. Those white people with high school diplomas saw their jobs go overseas, not to less educated black people.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 3:42 PM on April 15, 2016 [13 favorites]
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 3:42 PM on April 15, 2016 [13 favorites]
So there is a theory that I've seen and can look for if you're interested, that "must have a college degree" is the new "must have a high school degree" or standardized test of pre-1971 - that it's a way of sorting out people to get who they want that doesn't flag discrimination radar, because college can convincingly be argued to be specialized.
If that in fact is true - which honestly, it's an argument I think may well be - then the increasing need for "educated" jobs that require a college degree you must pay for, as opposed to a high school degree that is free, can in fact be laid at least partially at that door. As can the increasing cost of tuition - if you can't get a job without it, they have every incentive to raise prices.
That's in no way the fault of the individual people who benefit or benefited in the past from those EEOC rulings - but at the same time, it can at the very least be seriously contended that it is causal.
posted by corb at 7:46 PM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
If that in fact is true - which honestly, it's an argument I think may well be - then the increasing need for "educated" jobs that require a college degree you must pay for, as opposed to a high school degree that is free, can in fact be laid at least partially at that door. As can the increasing cost of tuition - if you can't get a job without it, they have every incentive to raise prices.
That's in no way the fault of the individual people who benefit or benefited in the past from those EEOC rulings - but at the same time, it can at the very least be seriously contended that it is causal.
posted by corb at 7:46 PM on April 15, 2016 [2 favorites]
I'd be far more inclined to believe that "must have a college degree" became the new "minimum standard" as a way of red-lining jobs - ensuring that your workforce stays majority white because more PoC's don't have college degrees - once increasing numbers of PoC's got high school diplomas.
And at any rate, you still are not proving or even providing evidence of an actual direct correlation between job loss among whites being caused by job gains among blacks. Nor are you providing any evidence or proof that job loss among whites is correlated to the reduction of systemic privilege.
Quit the FoxNews/Rush Limbaugh shtick of implying that one thing causes another simply because you mention them in the same sentence. Come up with some evidence and proof of connections.
posted by soundguy99 at 9:31 PM on April 15, 2016 [5 favorites]
And at any rate, you still are not proving or even providing evidence of an actual direct correlation between job loss among whites being caused by job gains among blacks. Nor are you providing any evidence or proof that job loss among whites is correlated to the reduction of systemic privilege.
Quit the FoxNews/Rush Limbaugh shtick of implying that one thing causes another simply because you mention them in the same sentence. Come up with some evidence and proof of connections.
posted by soundguy99 at 9:31 PM on April 15, 2016 [5 favorites]
Isn't most job loss among whites now blamed by Trump et. al on Mexicans and "illegals", and isn't that where most of the "publicly acceptable" racism is now being directed? Blacks get shouted down if they protest, but Mexicans are now getting shouted down even if they haven't said a word. Chappelle touched on some of these changing racial/racist dynamics in his First Black President bit a number of years ago.
posted by clawsoon at 10:05 PM on April 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by clawsoon at 10:05 PM on April 15, 2016 [1 favorite]
Interesting parallel, kalessin. I suspect that all sides want a unified society, though. It's just that the bigots and the people who want war want a society that's unified by putting themselves at the top and erasing everyone they don't like. The opposite kind of unity...
posted by clawsoon at 3:39 PM on April 16, 2016
posted by clawsoon at 3:39 PM on April 16, 2016
« Older Order! Ordaaaar! | People Who Write Theatre Reviews Are Very Easily... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by hoyland at 5:03 AM on April 15, 2016 [54 favorites]