Another White Guy Tries To Explain Privilege

Post Reply New Topic

Letting the truth get in the way of what your want. I put this one first for a reason, because it's the mistake that I probably see the most often, and the one that I think is the most destructive. I'll give an example. Take a poor white person who's struggling to get along, and tell them that they not only have it easy compared to whatever minority group you're representing, but that they're actively contributing to oppression by virtue of their white privilege, even though they're not consciously doing so. Do you think that person is going to be particularly receptive to your message, even if it happens to be true? (I'm not going to argue whether it's true either way) How about a man being told he's a part of "rape culture" or "the patriarchy" and complicit in the oppression of women, again, absent any conscious action on his part? Think he's going to leap up and support feminism if approached that way? I sure wouldn't, and I happen to agree with most of the stated goals of feminism. There is a reason that the word Feminazi found such wide and instantaneous acceptance, as most everyone has been exposed someone who's taken it too far and alienated far more people than they've educated.

Even better, if anyone of a gender, race, class, etc that you consider to be privileged ever complains about being discriminated against, loudly mock and denigrate them, "poor little white boy" perhaps summing it up most succinctly; that'll really win people over to your point of view...

"But Dox", you say, "group X really does contribute to oppression merely by accepting the status quo", to which I answer "so what?". Is your goal simply to loudly air your grievances about justifiably infuriating inequities, or do you actually want to sway opinion and foment change? If it's the former, go ahead and stick to "the truth" at all costs, even as it erodes your support by alienating the very people that you need to persuade in order to make progress towards you ideal society; if it's that latter, perhaps you should consider a more nuanced approach, more honey and less vinegar. Most people are in favor of equality, most people are in favor of fairness, but getting in people's faces and painting them personally as the oppressors of society is a certain path to defensiveness and having your message shut out by cognitive dissonance.

I totally regret all those times I've painted people as the oppressor. No, wait, I haven't done that and neither did the author of the article I linked to.

Dox47, you're arguing against people who aren't here, opposing arguments that haven't been made here.

Privilege doesn't refer to one person simply having an advantage another does not. Privilege refers to the advantages a member of group A has that a member of group B has not, arising from the fact that group A has systematically oppressed group B.

I wasn't arguing against a specific point, but rather pointing out how arguing about "privilege" generally tends to fail, for all the reasons I pointed out, plus some I didn't. There's a whole thread attached to that link, I only excerpted my opener.