I see that alot.
Hard to miss it. Those things are huge.
No, they don’t.
You have provided zero examples, and based on my experience, I doubt that any exist. I am always happy to be shown wrong. But the conspicuous lack of such demonstrations in this thread should be telling.
LOL - a classic example of privilege on your part! Because you’ve never experienced it, you think it doesn’t happen!
I have personally experienced it.
I will be happy to go find an example I can link to as well, but I’m in a meeting all day today so I’ll get back to you later.
Take your time.
But explicitly asked for you to share your experience, and explicitly said I am interested in hearing how my experience may not be representative.
You’re trying to score rhetorical points, and failing hard. So why don’t you stop trying to score rhetorical points, and instead, engage the actual question?
Looking forward to it.
No, you denied my experience, and tried to substitute yours for mine. Classic “check your privilege” situation.
But never mind.
Let’s clarify the actual question first so there’s no confusion. I was responding to this statement:
“White privilege does not confer an insurmountable absolute advantage nor does it claim that whites have it easy.”
I say some people do use white privilege to mean that whites either have an insurmountable absolute advantage or that whites have it easy. You are asking me to give an example or two of people saying one of those two.
Agreed?
(If so, I can’t believe you actually think white privilege doesn’t mean “whites have it easy” to anyone, but whatever).
Your attempted parody just exhibits your lack of comprehension. I’ve already explained this, just one post ago, so I don’t think it will be useful to repeat myself here.
What would be needed (to show that “white privilege” means, to some people who use the word straightforwardly in doing cultural criticism, insurmountable absolute advantage or always having it easy) would be examples of people using the term “white privilege” without meaning to criticize the use of the term, (in other words, using the term sincerely and straightforwardly to describe a phenomenon), where it is not possible that the speaker would affirm that whites sometimes don’t have it easy, or where it is not possible that the speaker would affirm that whites do not have an insurmountable absolute advantage.
I think you were pretty clear. Like I said, never mind.
By adding “sometimes” you completely mess with the language, leaving you an out. I don’t accept it.
Look, let’s be straight. Sure, it might be hard to show that someone believes whites have an “insurmountable absolute advantage” unless they use those very words (though I still think some people do think that), but you can’t be serious if you’re arguing that nobody who says “white privilege” can mean “whites have it easy.” That’s essentially a casual definition of white privilege.
Look, it’s wrong to assume that all white people have easy lives just for being white. As a group, they have it easier than blacks, sure, but you can’t extrapolate that to an individual (that would be, you know, racism). I have personally heard people say just that. It’s no big deal - people misuse and abuse ideas all the time. You don’t need to deny that it happens. Just say those people are wrong and move on.
That’s not remotely what it means, and if it hadn’t been explained multiple times in this thread, I’d think your ignorance was fightable. So yes: I defy you to find a single person who uses the phrase in a way that shows
- They think it’s a useful phrase; and
- They think it means that all white people have it easy, full stop.
You are missing the point.
YOU may think that’s not what it means. But plenty of people who use it DO think that’s what it means, and they are going around saying it.
If you disagree with them, fine, but you need to face that reality.
If all white people don’t have it, it’s not “white privilege” is it?
The very term assumes that all whites - or to be more precise, any given white about whom you know nothing else but his/her race - enjoys it.
What is the purpose of the term at all? What was wrong with pointing out that blacks and other minorities often face discrimination or poverty, rather than turning it around the other way? By doing so, people often use the term to imply that all whites are guilty of perpetuating the privilege, or using it to discount a white person’s problems or white person’s opinions simply by saying they are naive or above it all.
To expand on my last comment - suppose we accept the term and only use it the way you want. What do you want? When you point out white privilege, exactly what do you think a given white person should do about it?
The “sometimes” has to be there for it to be the logical negation of what you were proposing.
What you’ve just said is analogous to the following: You asking me what it would take to prove that not all clouds are white, and me telling you it would require showing that clouds are sometimes non-white. Then you coming back by saying “By adding ‘sometimes’ you’ve given yourself an out, I don’t accept it.”
I’ve done no such thing. I’ve explicated what would be required, logically, for you to provide an example of the claim you’re making. The “sometimes” is logically required. If you don’t think the “sometimes” belongs, then you’re not ready to make the claim you think you’re making!
LHoD’s response suffices here.
And I know of no one who uses the term “white privilege” to express such an assumption. Still waiting for an example.
You would be right, if you had on hand some examples.
Alternatively, you don’t need to deny that you’ve been completely misconstruing what people have been saying when they use this phrase. Just say you’ve learned something, and move on.
That is very context specific. Often the point is to help the person see they’ve been making unfounded assumptions about what life is like for other people, without even knowing they were assuming anything. Other times, the point is to urge them to take actions to elevate some relevant minority. Other times, the point is to “plant a seed” in hopes that the person will begin, themselves, handling certain scenarios differently. It really depends.
Lance you’re literally failing to comprehend what you are talking about. You have a fundamental failure to understand the meaning of the term.
First of all, “white privilege” applies to the great majority of social contexts in the world, but not necessarily all. It does not attach to absolutely every white person who has ever existed. Rather, it attaches to every white person you or I could have any plausible expectation of interacting with anytime in our own lives. That may not be obvious, but it’s a truth about the meaning of the term. If you thought otherwise, then think about what I’ve just said in subsequent instances in which you hear the term and see if it helps make sense of the usage.
Second, not every person to whom it does apply “has it easy.” Being a recipient of white privilege does not mean having it easy. This is not what it means. We have said this many many times and you have provided zero examples, despite some bluster along those lines, of people using it to mean that.
You have misunderstood the term. When you have misunderstood something, the thing to do is correct yourself.
It is not necessary to “have it easy” in order to “have white privilege.” Rather it is just necessary that you have easier access to certain goods than others do, which most people of most demographics value, by virtue of the color of your skin. This doesn’t necessarily make things easy for you. But it does make you privileged. (General you… I have no idea what your own skin color is of course.)
It isn’t that all white people have it eqsy, or easier than all black people, but that all or nearly all white people have it easier than a black person would in otherwise identical circumstances. So a rich white guy has it easier than a rich black guy, and a poor white guy has it easier than a poor black guy, all other things being equal.
And you’re doing it again - you’re assuming that YOU know what I have heard, and what people talking to ME were thinking, and what I was thinking about it.
Not playing this game.
Okay.
So what? Isn’t that obvious?
Why talk about it? What is gained?
How does it apply to an individual white person? Does it mean that an individual white person automatically has it easy? (You just said it doesn’t, so I guess that’s settled.) So why would one ever use it to tell an individual white person that they have privilege, when one can’t know that? Why would one every tell an individual white person they can’t possibly understand something because of their privilege?
An individual cannot be judged based on his group membership. That’s racism. I have no problem with the idea of white privilege in general. My problem is when it is used to imply things about given individuals.
Prove it. I don’t think it’s a reality. You said you’d come back with examples, but you don’t have them, do you.
Exactly: white privilege is not “having it easy.” White privilege is, if I’m going to try to get something close to what you think it is, “having it easier than a black person would have it under otherwise identical circumstances.”
Yes–but “it” isn’t what you think “it” is.
And you still don’t get the point.
It’s not me who is using the term wrong. Your beef isn’t with me. Stop denying that anyone ever uses it wrong.
Of course it does. And I’m not saying that others misapply it that way.
Why would you quibble with the “having it easy” description? What else does privilege mean? It’s no big deal, and it’s off the topic, but I find it strange you object to that.
Again, your beef isn’t with me.
Please explain how one can have a privilege that doesn’t make things easy. It’s practically the definition.