Does the term White Privilege hurt it's own cause

[monstro]

@Robert163

you seem to define it so formally though. people are people. i think most people are going to react like i do to the term, defensively. whether or not we should react that way is not the point really.

You haven’t proposed a better term to describe the benefit that comes with belonging to a group that has recently oppressed another.

I’m not saying “white privilege” is the best term. But it describes something that is real.

We could, instead of focusing on white people in the power equation, just focus on black people. We can just continue saying stuff like, “It’s a shame that Deshawn faces discrimination because of his name and it’s a shame everyone assumes he’s criminal, stupid, and lazy just because he’s black.” But how can you talk about how unfair this is without pointing out that it’s not fair that David is given the opposite treatment, for equally spurious reasons? Maybe it is this kind of conversation that makes you feel uncomfortable, which is perfectly understandable. The favored child in the family doesn’t like talking about their lofty status either. But sometimes the topic needs to be discussed. Propose a better term–one that doesn’t make someone somewhere feel guilty–and maybe it will find its way in the lexicon.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

I have mixed reactions to the idea of privilege. TO discuss its downside, I gotta move away from white privilege and into straight privilege.

First, it’s a very useful concept. As a white guy, I faced a lot of advantages growing up relative to someone who grew up black. I still face these advantages every day.

Suggesting that categorizing people by race is racist is a deeply ridiculous idea. I also categorize people by job, even though there’s no biological basis for doing so; rather, it’s a cultural idea, and culture is a very real thing. If you refuse to recognize this very real cultural concept, you’re engaging in willful ignorance. Folks who are identified as black in our culture face a very different daily reality from that experienced by folks who are identified as white. Indeed, being able to be “race-blind” with no repercussions in your life is itself an aspect of white privilege: us white folks live a life in which we don’t get negative treatment based on race on a very regular basis, so we can pretend that race doesn’t matter.

THat’s the good part of the concept of privilege. Used properly, it helps folks think about the ways in which their culture gives them an advantage.

The bad part is the sloppy, stupid thinking that often surrounds it. Last time the topic came up, folks pressed me for an example, and a few months ago some FB friends obliged me with one.

After the anti-SSM amendment passed in NC, a gay friend in Colorado wrote, “All the folks with souls have already left the South” and suggested the rest of the country secede. This pissed me off, and I pointed out that my gay friends here in NC who are struggling to obtain legal equality are not soulless, that 40% of us Tarheels voted against the amendment, that snide comments like his actually made our struggle for equality harder, and that if he really wanted to help, there are certain organizations working for equality in the South he could join.

Another friend came along and excoriated me for my comments: how dare I, a privileged straight white male, criticize a gay man for his comments on this topic?

That’s idiotic. But it happens: the idea of “privilege” is used to stifle debate, to suggest that someone may have nothing to say on a topic, depending on an accident of their birth.

[Robert163]

@monstro

You haven’t proposed a better term to describe the benefit that comes with belonging to a group that has recently oppressed another.

I’m not saying “white privilege” is the best term. But it describes something that is real.

We could, instead of focusing on white people in the power equation, just focus on black people. We can just continue saying stuff like, “It’s a shame that Deshawn faces discrimination because of his name and it’s a shame everyone assumes he’s criminal, stupid, and lazy just because he’s black.” But how can you talk about how unfair this is without pointing out that it’s not fair that David is given the opposite treatment, for equally spurious reasons? Maybe it is this kind of conversation that makes you feel uncomfortable, which is perfectly understandable. The favored child in the family doesn’t like talking about their lofty status either. But sometimes the topic needs to be discussed. Propose a better term–one that doesn’t make someone somewhere feel guilty–and maybe it will find its way in the lexicon.

well, i have to say, very good response and part of my “delima” is that i can’t think of a better term either…

[Robert163]

@Left_Hand_of_Dorkness

I have mixed reactions to the idea of privilege. TO discuss its downside, I gotta move away from white privilege and into straight privilege.

First, it’s a very useful concept. As a white guy, I faced a lot of advantages growing up relative to someone who grew up black. I still face these advantages every day.

Suggesting that categorizing people by race is racist is a deeply ridiculous idea. I also categorize people by job, even though there’s no biological basis for doing so; rather, it’s a cultural idea, and culture is a very real thing. If you refuse to recognize this very real cultural concept, you’re engaging in willful ignorance. Folks who are identified as black in our culture face a very different daily reality from that experienced by folks who are identified as white. Indeed, being able to be “race-blind” with no repercussions in your life is itself an aspect of white privilege: us white folks live a life in which we don’t get negative treatment based on race on a very regular basis, so we can pretend that race doesn’t matter.

THat’s the good part of the concept of privilege. Used properly, it helps folks think about the ways in which their culture gives them an advantage.

The bad part is the sloppy, stupid thinking that often surrounds it. Last time the topic came up, folks pressed me for an example, and a few months ago some FB friends obliged me with one.

After the anti-SSM amendment passed in NC, a gay friend in Colorado wrote, “All the folks with souls have already left the South” and suggested the rest of the country secede. This pissed me off, and I pointed out that my gay friends here in NC who are struggling to obtain legal equality are not soulless, that 40% of us Tarheels voted against the amendment, that snide comments like his actually made our struggle for equality harder, and that if he really wanted to help, there are certain organizations working for equality in the South he could join.

Another friend came along and excoriated me for my comments: how dare I, a privileged straight white male, criticize a gay man for his comments on this topic?

That’s idiotic. But it happens: the idea of “privilege” is used to stifle debate, to suggest that someone may have nothing to say on a topic, depending on an accident of their birth.

good post
BTW, the only think i don’t like about NC is, too many smokers. do they still let people smoke in restaurants/indoors?

[tomndebb]

@Old_Red

Anyone here think Robert163 is a Troll?

It is a violation of SDMB rules to accuse another poster of trolling outside the BBQ Pit.

If one believes that another poster is trolling, Report the pertinent posts. Do not make a public accusation.

[ /Moderating ]

[tomndebb]

@Der_Trihs

“White privilege” - like another old favorite, “the patriarchy” - presumes a solidarity among whites (or males, in the latter case) which doesn’t exist.

This argument wanders between advancing a straw man and poisononing the well.

There is no presumption of solidarity unless one imposes it from the outside. It does not even address the issue of the actors in any situation; it addresses those acted upon. I have pointed out several cases of white privilege in previous discussions that have demonstrated how the people extending white privilege include not merely whites in the power structure, but blacks, as well. White privilege is an institutional issue. It is not one formally imposed by any institution, but it is one that is embedded in the institution of society.

@Der_Trihs

And it’s rhetoric that alienates whites who are among the downtrodden who might otherwise be inclined to support any push for equality, if it wasn’t being presented to them as “whites are evil”.

There are occasions when it has been used wrongly to denigrate some whites, (and other occasions when some whites have reactd against it wthout paying attention to what it actually means), but that only points out how it can be distorted, not that it is inherently a bad term or an inaccurate one.

[Robert163]

@tomndebb

This argument wanders between advancing a straw man and poisononing the well.

There is no presumption of solidarity unless one imposes it from the outside. It does not even address the issue of the actors in any situation; it addresses those acted upon. I have pointed out several cases of white privilege in previous discussions that have demonstrated how the people extending white privilege include not merely whites in the power structure, but blacks, as well. White privilege is an institutional issue. It is not one formally imposed by any institution, but it is one that is embedded in the institution of society.

There are occasions when it has been used wrongly to denigrate some whites, (and other occasions when some whites have reactd against it wthout paying attention to what it actually means), but that only points out how it can be distorted, not that it is inherently a bad term or an inaccurate one.

ok, well, what about the idea that rightly or wrongly it makes many white people defensive? I can’t get my head around the proper response to that question.

[monstro]

@Robert163

ok, well, what about the idea that rightly or wrongly it makes many white people defensive? I can’t get my head around the proper response to that question.

Lots of things make people feel defensive, rightly or wrongly. Is the solution not to talk about these things, or to keep talking about them so that people become desensitized and have better understanding?

[Ulfreida]

@Robert163

ok, well, what about the idea that rightly or wrongly it makes many white people defensive? I can’t get my head around the proper response to that question.

When people get defensive, doesn’t it suggest they have something to defend? Like, oh just guessing, white privilege?

Seems to me that it’s a human trait to want to hang on to privileges, and they’ll do a whole lot of complex arguing and rationalizing in order to feel okay about enjoying benefits which require that others go without.

You may have to look hard to find a term that makes whites comfortable and fully aware at the same time.

[heathen_earthling]

@monstro

We can just continue saying stuff like, “It’s a shame that Deshawn faces discrimination because of his name and it’s a shame everyone assumes he’s criminal, stupid, and lazy just because he’s black.” But how can you talk about how unfair this is without pointing out that it’s not fair that David is given the opposite treatment, for equally spurious reasons?

No, a common name like David just doesn’t have any strong connotations for most people. I wouldn’t assume a David was criminal, stupid, or lazy, but I wouldn’t assume he wasn’t any of those things, either.

[monstro]

@heathen_earthling

No, a common name like David just doesn’t have any strong connotations for most people. I wouldn’t assume a David was criminal, stupid, or lazy, but I wouldn’t assume he wasn’t any of those things, either.

But would you assume the same with Deshawn?

If you put an ad on craigslist for a college kid to fix your computer on the cheap, and a person named DAVID HENDERSON texts you in response and a guy named DESHAWN JACKSON emails you, which one are you going to call first? What kinds of judgments cross your mind as you make this decision?

If it’s anything other than, “David and Deshawn are equally unknown entities. Let me call both of them before making a decision”, then you are prejudiced. If you are an American, regardless of race, you are more likely to be prejudiced in favor of David. Whether or not you assume he’s a genius or that he’s merely a law-abiding citizen, he STILL has an unfair advantage in this situation because his name is “whiter”.

[even_sven]

“White privilege” has a rather specific meaning, and it isn’t “white people get extra good stuff” or “white people have no problems.” If you are going to complain about the term, at least learn what it means.

White privilege refers quite specifically to the idea that white people rarely have to think about their race and are rarely defined by it. It refers to the fact that in our society, “white” is the default, and others are defined according to how they vary from it.

It means not being made aware of your race in daily interactions. When I go to a job interview, I rarely think about how my race is going to factor in to it. I’m just a candidate, not a “white candidate.” When I teach, I’m just a teacher, not the “white teacher.” When I interact with others, be it the police, a business, a landlord, etc. I don’t think about how my race is affecting the interaction. I don’t think about how my race makes others see me. Whiteness comes with a sense of belonging basically anywhere in US society. When I step on the bus, sit down at a bar, go to a restaurant, etc. I don’t do the subconscious calculation of what the race mix is and how I fit into that. White privilege means you get to be yourself first, and not your race first. When I speak up in a classroom, nobody assumes I speak with the voice of my race. When I’m being drunk and obnoxious downtown after clubbing, I don’t reflect poorly on white folks. When I do something well, nobody says that I’m an “articulate” white person. I am not an ambassador of whiteness. I am just myself.

Finally, it means that my cultural habits are understood and catered for. I do not need to modify my dialect when I go to a job interview. When I wear casual clothes common in my social group, it doesn’t have negative connotations. Nobody finds my pop music threatening. I don’t need to watch a niche TV show or watch niche movies to see love stories and comedies that speak to my culture. My culture is just there, everywhere, seamlessly.

I’ve spent years as a minority outside the US, and it’s exhausting. I felt like every time I walked into a room or entered an interaction, there was me, and then there was also this whole other thing that is my race, following me around with baggage I never created. When I’d talk to someone, they would be talking to me, but also to “white girl.” I had friends and social support groups, but I was always their “white friend,” not just Sven. When I’d walk into a store or restaurant, I could see the discomfort on people faces- what was I doing there? Where was I from? How should they act? Was I going to be an issue? It’s a lot to take on every time you hop into 7-11 to buy toilet paper. And this slight bit of uneasiness, this nagging little extra awareness, grinds on you. It makes you tired, and eventually it starts to wear on your very sense of self. I felt like i was always apologizing for myself, for my awkward existence.

Not having that? It’s a privilege.

[Spice_Weasel]

@Robert163

well, i have to say, very good response and part of my “delima” is that i can’t think of a better term either…

I don’t think the term ‘‘white privilege’’ is really what is at issue here. It’s the concept - that white people generally have it easier than black people - that people find so alienating. You could call it Mr. Crofter’s Jellybeans and people would still have a problem with it.

I completely believe in the concept of white privilege, but it was difficult for me to confront at first. When someone tells you that you are privileged, your first reaction is to think about every horrible thing you’ve ever had to endure. The very concept itself seems to negate the very real suffering of white people.

But that’s only if you take it personally. If you can learn to see it as a sociological concept, an institutional concept, then it’s not so threatening. Also, you have to stop seeing it as a dichotomy. As monstro points out, white privilege is also conferred upon whites by minorities. We are all socially conditioned to view whites as superior. The most basic example I can give are the Implicit Association Tests wherein people of all races find it neurologically easier to associate goodness with whites and badness with blacks. It does not mean we are all racist in the conscious, malevolent sense. It means most just have unconscious biases. This is not difficult to understand if you look at the way minorities are portrayed in the media and stereotyped by society. The decision a cop makes in three adrenaline-fueled seconds to fire upon a potentially armed black person - that is not often a deliberate racist act. It is the result of decades of social conditioning and an unconscious bias. That is what is really meant by ‘‘white privilege.’’

Personally I love Freire’s view of the matter, which is that there is an oppressor and an oppressed in all of us. I have learned to view the concept of privilege not as a dichotomy but as something we all have in some way. We are all outcast and marginalized in some respect, and we all have the potential to exploit the less powerful, regardless of race, class, or gender. We all have a responsibility to own that. So goes one of my favorite quotes: ‘‘Until all of us are free, none of us are free.’’

[brickbacon]

@even_sven

“White privilege” has a rather specific meaning, and it isn’t “white people get extra good stuff” or “white people have no problems.” If you are going to complain about the term, at least learn what it means.

White privilege refers quite specifically to the idea that white people rarely have to think about their race and are rarely defined by it. It refers to the fact that in our society, “white” is the default, and others are defined according to how they vary from it.

It means not being made aware of your race in daily interactions. When I go to a job interview, I rarely think about how my race is going to factor in to it. I’m just a candidate, not a “white candidate.” When I teach, I’m just a teacher, not the “white teacher.” When I interact with others, be it the police, a business, a landlord, etc. I don’t think about how my race is affecting the interaction. I don’t think about how my race makes others see me. Whiteness comes with a sense of belonging basically anywhere in US society. When I step on the bus, sit down at a bar, go to a restaurant, etc. I don’t do the subconscious calculation of what the race mix is and how I fit into that. White privilege means you get to be yourself first, and not your race first. When I speak up in a classroom, nobody assumes I speak with the voice of my race. When I’m being drunk and obnoxious downtown after clubbing, I don’t reflect poorly on white folks. When I do something well, nobody says that I’m an “articulate” white person. I am not an ambassador of whiteness. I am just myself.

Finally, it means that my cultural habits are understood and catered for. I do not need to modify my dialect when I go to a job interview. When I wear casual clothes common in my social group, it doesn’t have negative connotations. Nobody finds my pop music threatening. I don’t need to watch a niche TV show or watch niche movies to see love stories and comedies that speak to my culture. My culture is just there, everywhere, seamlessly.

I’ve spent years as a minority outside the US, and it’s exhausting. I felt like every time I walked into a room or entered an interaction, there was me, and then there was also this whole other thing that is my race, following me around with baggage I never created. When I’d talk to someone, they would be talking to me, but also to “white girl.” I had friends and social support groups, but I was always their “white friend,” not just Sven. When I’d walk into a store or restaurant, I could see the discomfort on people faces- what was I doing there? Where was I from? How should they act? Was I going to be an issue? It’s a lot to take on every time you hop into 7-11 to buy toilet paper. And this slight bit of uneasiness, this nagging little extra awareness, grinds on you. It makes you tired, and eventually it starts to wear on your very sense of self. I felt like i was always apologizing for myself, for my awkward existence.

Not having that? It’s a privilege.

Excellent post. Especially the part about people here not understanding what the term means.

white privilege is a way of conceptualizing racial inequalities that focuses as much on the advantages that white people accrue from society as on the disadvantages that people of color experience. White privilege may be defined as the “unearned advantages of being White in a racially stratified society”, and has been characterized as an expression of institutional power that is largely unacknowledged by most White individuals.[1] Most such theories focus on American and European societal condition, since inequality between whites and non-whites is a long-standing feature of these academic areas.

White privilege differs from conditions of overt racism or prejudice, in which a dominant group actively seeks to oppress or suppress other racial groups for its own advantage. Instead, theories of white privilege suggest that whites view their social, cultural, and economic experiences as a norm that everyone should experience, rather than as an advantaged position that must be maintained at the expense of others. It is argued that this normative assumption implicitly constrains discussions of racial inequality within the dominant discourse: such explanations are limited to factors specific to disadvantaged racial groups - who are viewed as having failed to achieve the norm - and solutions focus on what can be done to help those groups achieve the ‘normal’ standards experienced by whites.

In essence, theories of white privilege assert that discourses on racial inequality do not truly discuss differences between white and non-white social status, but only discuss the failure of non-white groups to achieve normal social status, effectively turning race into an issue that does not involve whites. In this sense it is similar to confirmation biases and the fundamental attribution error in social psychology.[citation needed]

The general claim of theories of white privilege is that racial inequity cannot be resolved solely by looking at the life conditions of disadvantaged groups.[citation needed] They suggest that solutions to problems of racial inequality can only be achieved by explicitly discussing the implicit advantages that whites as a group hold in society.

Note that there is no talk about EVERY White person have a great life of leisure. The term was used to examine how whiteness being as accepted as the norm skews our perceptions of race and normalcy. I don’t see how anyone can object to that too much given the evidence we have that that is the case.

People getting irked by the term is just another example of an academic term being misused and misunderstood by laymen.

[panaccione]

- YouTube

Relevant link - Tim Wise: The Pathology of White Priviledge.

[Max_the_Immortal]

I think that main problem with the term is that it, and much of the language attached to it, is very prone to unintentional phrasings that rub people the wrong way, leading to unnecessary tangents about terminology and not substance. Take, for example, this bit from monstro’s post:

@monstro

We can just continue saying stuff like, “It’s a shame that Deshawn faces discrimination because of his name and it’s a shame everyone assumes he’s criminal, stupid, and lazy just because he’s black.” But how can you talk about how unfair this is without pointing out that it’s not fair that David is given the opposite treatment, for equally spurious reasons?

Bolding mine. It’s easy to get the impression that monstro is saying that David should not get the treatment he receives. I don’t think this is the case. I think that everyone in this thread can agree with the statements: “David is treated the way that everyone should be treated. It is unfair that Deshawn isn’t treated the way David is. Deshawn should be treated the way David is.”. Framing the situation as: “It is unfair that David is treated better than Deshawn is.” is a roundabout way of saying the same thing in a less clear manner. It adds nothing (productive) to the conversation, but can get it bogged down in “No, I wasn’t saying that David should be treated worse.” hijacks. This can divert the discussion onto affirmative action or other not-actually-relevant topics.

@brickbacon

The term was used to examine how whiteness being as accepted as the norm skews our perceptions of race and normalcy. I don’t see how anyone can object to that too much given the evidence we have that that is the case.

People getting irked by the term is just another example of an academic term being misused and misunderstood by laymen.

Perhaps it would be worthwhile to find another term less prone to misinterpretation. “White normalcy” (or more generally “race normalcy” to account for countries where a non-white race is the norm), perhaps? It seems more accurate and even sounds more like an academic term with a specific definition that a lay person shouldn’t just guess at.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@Max_the_Immortal

Bolding mine. It’s easy to get the impression that monstro is saying that David should not get the treatment he receives. I don’t think this is the case. I think that everyone in this thread can agree with the statements: “David is treated the way that everyone should be treated. It is unfair that Deshawn isn’t treated the way David is. Deshawn should be treated the way David is.”. Framing the situation as: “It is unfair that David is treated better than Deshawn is.” is a roundabout way of saying the same thing in a less clear manner. It adds nothing (productive) to the conversation, but can get it bogged down in “No, I wasn’t saying that David should be treated worse.” hijacks. This can divert the discussion onto affirmative action or other not-actually-relevant topics.

It has no prescriptive benefit, I agree. What it does, however, is it helps folks with privilege realize that things they take for granted can’t be taken for granted by everyone, and that they need to listen to other folks’ experiences rather than just saying that seeing race is a racist thing to do. If you’ve got the privilege, part of what that means is that you may be unaware of what’s going on for people who don’t have the privilege.

It doesn’t help you know what to do in the future. It helps you analyze what’s happening right now.

[Odesio]

@brickbacon

People getting irked by the term is just another example of an academic term being misused and misunderstood by laymen.

Privilege (not just white) is a term I’ve seen popping up on various internet forums over the last year. Often it doesn’t seem to be used correctly, and, as another poster pointed out, the term is sometimes used as a club to stifle debate.

Has anyone else noticed privilege being brought up more on internet forums or am I just imagining things?

[heathen_earthling]

@monstro

If you put an ad on craigslist for a college kid to fix your computer on the cheap, and a person named DAVID HENDERSON texts you in response and a guy named DESHAWN JACKSON emails you, which one are you going to call first? What kinds of judgments cross your mind as you make this decision?

I’m going to call Deshawn first, because he e-mailed me instead of texted. I check e-mails all the time, texts almost never. Unless, of course, I posted the ad because my computer is too broken to check e-mails.

I’d assume a guy named Deshawn Jackson was probably African-American, but I wouldn’t assume anything else about him.

@monstro

If it’s anything other than, “David and Deshawn are equally unknown entities. Let me call both of them before making a decision”, then you are prejudiced.

There’s also the option of only contacting whoever’s message you saw first. Nothing prejudiced about that.

@even_sven

Finally, it means that my cultural habits are understood and catered for. I do not need to modify my dialect when I go to a job interview. When I wear casual clothes common in my social group, it doesn’t have negative connotations. Nobody finds my pop music threatening. I don’t need to watch a niche TV show or watch niche movies to see love stories and comedies that speak to my culture. My culture is just there, everywhere, seamlessly.

Is this because you’re white, or because you’re mainstream? Most hipsters/punks/goths/metalheads/whatever are white too, and they define their cultures with clothing and music not suitable for a typical job interview.

[brickbacon]

@Max_the_Immortal

Perhaps it would be worthwhile to find another term less prone to misinterpretation. “White normalcy” (or more generally “race normalcy” to account for countries where a non-white race is the norm), perhaps? It seems more accurate and even sounds more like an academic term with a specific definition that a lay person shouldn’t just guess at.

Why should academics find a new term just because people who can’t even do a basic google search misuse it? Should we get rid of the terms “global warming”, “natural selection”, “immaculate conception”, and “evolution” as well? All of those have been misused by people who don’t know what they are talking about.

@Odesio

Privilege (not just white) is a term I’ve seen popping up on various internet forums over the last year. Often it doesn’t seem to be used correctly, and, as another poster pointed out, the term is sometimes used as a club to stifle debate.

So what? Academia doesn’t exist to settle debates amongst laymen on the internet. If someone tries to do that, explain to them why they are wrong. Don’t insist that we need a new term because it’s been co-opted by people who don’t understand it.