Another White Guy Tries To Explain Privilege

Post Reply New Topic

Because the first attempt to have a civil discussion about this issue changed so many people's minds. This guy suggests actual experiments, though, and Aspies like evidence, right?

Full article

I don't believe in "privilege" as used by the internet at all.

Because you do realise, most people who ask someone to "check their privilege" don't appear to count us as unprivileged? The unsupported, misunderstood, oft attacked aspie/autistic? No, as long as we're white, straight, and male, we don't have any problems according to them. Thus why I hate them. Someone mentions privilege to me and I instantly don't want to converse a moment longer with them.

The cure for this sort of bias (which absolutely does exist) is mindfulness.

If we taught people to be more mindful from a young age, the world wouldn't be full of douchebags.

I thinkly you misunderstand the word privilege or do so on purpose. Privileged simply means having more benefit then someone else in an comparible situation. It does not mean to automatically live in a villa with an gigantic pool.

I am white and I am straight, and as you say yourself, that does not mean in any way, that I dont have ANY problems, and I dont think, that there are many people who would think of it that way. But it definitly means, that there are SOME situations where I get privileges that others wont get. I bet with you, that I will have it fifty times easier to travel by hitchhiking. Less because I am so beautiful, but more because there will be far less people, that think of me as as being potential dangerous. Just as there is simply a kind of indirect discrimination, that people dont do on purpose, but is still hurting others. When it comes to a friend of mine, both are dad were globetrotters in their young years. My dad married a french woman he met during that time, a friend of his married a woman from Zimbabwe (africa). Both me and my friend and her brother, have been born and raised in Austria, both our mothers are christian. Still noone ever asked me "Where I would come from?". Even when knowing, that my mom is from france, noone asked me, if I drive HOME to visit family, during holidays. O_o We have the same background with two moms coming from another country at the same time, that both had good education, still noone treats me like a foreigner, while it happens for her. Noone ever mentioned to me, how fluent I would speak my mother language german O_o, when hearing of my foreign mum. It´s meant friendly, but it still hurts people, because its tell them "I see you as something different, I dont have the same expectations on you, that I have on others, there is something between us, that keeps me from simply seeing you as I see most people."

Just as it was really weird, that when I was in Mauritius for wedding-holidays, the supermarket owner always started the in-store lights, when my partner an I came. "Look, here come the VIP-tourists, buying Red Bull and some plastic water-sandals." O_o

That definitely does not solve any problem in my life, or makes it perfect, but its simply a different kind of treating in some situations, that does exist, and when its simply weird to deny that.

I am pretty sure, there are not many white girls, that have been shot by now, for using the door bell of an nearbye living neighbor to receive some help, after an car crash.

You couldn't be bothered to read the article, then? I see no point in discussing it with you, since you insist on a false definition of the term.

Well debate on this subject is especially tricky because discussing the variables is fraught with danger. In social sciences, methodology is very important and the example in the article seemed to be quite reasonable but still not really that rigorous. Take for example, a chap named 'Dave'. Suppose we know that Dave is from a white family and he lives in the suburbs. Taken as a clean slate we might say he might have an advantage in life. Can we imagine other variables that might alter his status as 'privileged', certainly.

Thus when the issue is discussed, it can become a matter of discussing those variables, rather than the broad trend. The subject breaks down as post after post people go back and forth without establishing criteria and haphazardly applying it to situations and individuals. One side will claim suppressed variable and other will feel that the variables don't dismiss the broader trend. Suffice to say, its dangerous. Especially when people turn privilege into an attack on the privileged group. The opportunity is however there to increase awareness and discuss an interesting question in interesting ways but some just want to purge the Kulaks. The very worst way to remove a privilege is to assume that the group in question 'needs to be taken down a peg'.

You make some good points, 91, but these kinds of experiments are designed not to produce statistics, but to create awareness in the experimenter. People just need to overcome their own confirmation bias.

I also believe that most people argue against the idea of privilege because of their psychology rather than because of their philosophy. Everyone whose taken an introductory psychology course knows that people attribute the good things that happen to them to their own efforts. Bad things that happen get attributed to external causes. When evaluating other people, this is reversed. This fundamental attribution error makes it necessary to resist the idea of privilege in order to preserve their self-esteem.

Regrettably, the kinds mental processes that blind people to their own privilege help perpetuate injustice, so people need to wake up even if they take a little hit to their self-esteem.

Last edited by jrjones9933 on 16 Dec 2013, 10:47 am, edited 1 time in total.

Seems to me that that same psychological mechanism may also be part of the reason why so many are so quick to point out other's perceived privilege. That is, they are attributing the good things that happen to others and the bad things that happen to themselves to an external cause, privilege or the lack thereof.

I'm not saying that certain kinds of privilege don't exist. I'm just saying that, before attempting to educate others on how privileged they are, it is essential to consider ones own motives for doing so and to carefully examine all sides of any given situation before declaring it an example of privilege.

I don't actually see much merit in trying to educate someone about how privileged they are. If someone is acting like a douchebag, then I prefer to ask them to stop, tell them how that action makes me feel, and suggest a better course of action. If I don't have the patience to do that, then I just call them a douchebag and have done with it.

If the idea of privilege becomes widespread, then people will start to see it on their own. All the privilege checking that allegedly happens on the internet doesn't seem to be doing a whole lot of good.

I believe the people who promote these privileges are propagandist, because they don't truthfully identify the privileges that exist; most likely because it does not help their objectives. They generally seem to want to promote the existence of racism, and sexism, able-body-ism and sexual-orientation-ism, however, they leave off the privilege of intelligence, the privilege of education, the privilege of good looks, and most surprisingly the privilege of wealth.

Based on these lists ... if I am very intelligent, have a good education, and am good-looking, and have a fabulous amount of wealth than I am NOT privileged , however, if I add that I am heterosexual, then all of sudden I have privilege. This is why I say the promoters of the concept of privilege are propagandists.

They should recognize that the groups that faces the most discrimination are the un-intelligent/lesser-intelligent and un-educated/lesser-educated. However, if they do recognize these other privileges than they may offend everyone, because everyone would fall into one of the categories. So, perhaps, they decide to just fight for their particular "privilege".

Here is a list of privilege websites , notice how none of them list: intelligent, education, good looks or wealth as a privilege.

http://amptoons.com/blog/2006/09/26/a-l ... ege-lists/ NOPE NONE HERE
http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Privilege_checklist NOPE NONE HERE
http://privilege101.tumblr.com/post/598 ... n-progress NOPE NOT HERE

Last edited by LoveNotHate on 18 Dec 2013, 5:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Actually, the first one does mention wealth. The privilege of wealth is related to classism. Usually instead of wealth, class is referred to. Education is often related to several factors of privilege--the more privileged you are the more likely you are to reach a high educational attainment,--so you would want to look at the individual factors that went in, or even celebrate how a person who is a member of several oppressed groups was able to overcome all that and get an education. Also the third link does mention "lack of access to education." Good looks can go into such factors as well, such as fat shaming. Intelligence isn't really considered to be an important factor of privilege, but might be related to ableism, or more specifically mentalism, when it comes to those with an intellectual disability. But you're right, I didn't see that listed there: The closest was on the 3rd link, which mentioned neurotypical privilege.

As well, I do disagree with American privilege or U.S. citizen privilege. Rather, it is more relevant to think of Western privilege or developed country privilege, I believe.

I was using the above mentioned definition that I quoted. That one person as a benefit over another. It would seem that intelligence would qualify as a privilege in that sense. For example, the higher intelligent person gets the job over a lesser intelligent person. Also, the U.S. has a H1B foreign worker program to displace a lesser intelligent/lesser-educated worker with a superiorly intelligent/educated worker. (I hear people technology complaining about this a lot).



Yes.

Do you think they are propagandists, perhaps un-intentionally or not, because they only identify certain groups of people as privileged, perhaps so they don't identify and possibly upset the people that will listen to them ?

I suspect that many of the people who chimed in on this thread griping about problems with the idea of privilege never bothered to click the link and read the article before commencing flogging the poor ex-horse that got so badly beaten in the last thread. None of them mentioned the specific examples of eye-opening experiences that the author describes, and none of them pointed out that the author never used the word privilege in his article. 91 clearly did read it, and I really appreciate anyone who will take 5-7 minutes to do so if only in the interest of offering a criticism that is actually on topic.

I mentioned earlier that I don't see much point in privilege checking (and I'll add privilege checklists). Cultivation of mindfulness, as GoonSquad suggests, will help anyone who would places a higher priority on being considerate than on maintaining a feeling of being persecuted.

You made me laugh

humble apologies ...

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.

Allow past me to explain why this isn't going to go anywhere:

http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp5375806.html#5375806