The Concept of Privilege

[Darth Executor]

From here:

I decided to try to work on myself at least by identifying some of the daily effects of white privilege in my life. I have chosen those conditions that I think in my case attach somewhat more to skin-color privilege than to class, religion, ethnic status, or geographic location, though of course all these other factors are intricately intertwined. As far as I can tell, my African American coworkers, friends, and acquaintances with whom I come into daily or frequent contact in this particular time, place and time of work cannot count on most of these conditions.

1. I can if I wish arrange to be in the company of people of my race most of the time.
2. I can avoid spending time with people whom I was trained to mistrust and who have learned to mistrust my kind or me.
3. 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.
4. I can be pretty sure that my neighbors in such a location will be neutral or pleasant to me.
5. I can go shopping alone most of the time, pretty well assured that I will not be followed or harassed.
6. I can turn on the television or open to the front page of the paper and see people of my race widely represented.
7. When I am told about our national heritage or about "civilization," I am shown that people of my color made it what it is.
8. I can be sure that my children will be given curricular materials that testify to the existence of their race.
9. If I want to, I can be pretty sure of finding a publisher for this piece on white privilege.
10. I can be pretty sure of having my voice heard in a group in which I am the only member of my race.

11. I can be casual about whether or not to listen to another person's voice in a group in which s/he is the only member of his/her race.
12. 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.
13. Whether I use checks, credit cards or cash, I can count on my skin color not to work against the appearance of financial reliability.
14. Ican arrange to protect my children most of the time from people who might not like them.
15. I do not have to educate my children to be aware of systemic racism for their own daily physical protection.
16. I can be pretty sure that my children's teachers and employers will tolerate them if they fit school and workplace norms; my chief worries about them do not concern others' attitudes toward their race.
17. I can talk with my mouth full and not have people put this down to my color.
18. I can swear, or dress in second hand clothes, or not answer letters, without having people attribute these choices to the bad morals, the poverty or the illiteracy of my race.
19. I can speak in public to a powerful male group without putting my race on trial.
20. I can do well in a challenging situation without being called a credit to my race.

21. I am never asked to speak for all the people of my racial group.
22. I can remain oblivious of the language and customs of persons of color who constitute the world's majority without feeling in my culture any penalty for such oblivion.
23. I can criticize our government and talk about how much I fear its policies and behavior without being seen as a cultural outsider.
24. I can be pretty sure that if I ask to talk to the "person in charge", I will be facing a person of my race.
25. If a traffic cop pulls me over or if the IRS audits my tax return, I can be sure I haven't been singled out because of my race.
26. I can easily buy posters, post-cards, picture books, greeting cards, dolls, toys and children's magazines featuring people of my race.
27. I can go home from most meetings of organizations I belong to feeling somewhat tied in, rather than isolated, out-of-place, outnumbered, unheard, held at a distance or feared.
28. I can be pretty sure that an argument with a colleague of another race is more likely to jeopardize her/his chances for advancement than to jeopardize mine.
29. I can be pretty sure that if I argue for the promotion of a person of another race, or a program centering on race, this is not likely to cost me heavily within my present setting, even if my colleagues disagree with me.
30. If I declare there is a racial issue at hand, or there isn't a racial issue at hand, my race will lend me more credibility for either position than a person of color will have.

31. I can choose to ignore developments in minority writing and minority activist programs, or disparage them, or learn from them, but in any case, I can find ways to be more or less protected from negative consequences of any of these choices.
32. My culture gives me little fear about ignoring the perspectives and powers of people of other races.
33. I am not made acutely aware that my shape, bearing or body odor will be taken as a reflection on my race.
34. I can worry about racism without being seen as self-interested or self-seeking.
35. I can take a job with an affirmative action employer without having my co-workers on the job suspect that I got it because of my race.
36. If my day, week or year is going badly, I need not ask of each negative episode or situation whether it had racial overtones.
37. I can be pretty sure of finding people who would be willing to talk with me and advise me about my next steps, professionally.
38. I can think over many options, social, political, imaginative or professional, without asking whether a person of my race would be accepted or allowed to do what I want to do.
39. I can be late to a meeting without having the lateness reflect on my race.
40. I can choose public accommodation without fearing that people of my race cannot get in or will be mistreated in the places I have chosen.

41. I can be sure that if I need legal or medical help, my race will not work against me.
42. I can arrange my activities so that I will never have to experience feelings of rejection owing to my race.
43. If I have low credibility as a leader I can be sure that my race is not the problem.
44. I can easily find academic courses and institutions which give attention only to people of my race.
45. I can expect figurative language and imagery in all of the arts to testify to experiences of my race.
46. I can chose blemish cover or bandages in "flesh" color and have them more or less match my skin.
47. I can travel alone or with my spouse without expecting embarrassment or hostility in those who deal with us.
48. I have no difficulty finding neighborhoods where people approve of our household.
49. My children are given texts and classes which implicitly support our kind of family unit and do not turn them against my choice of domestic partnership.
50. I will feel welcomed and "normal" in the usual walks of public life, institutional and social.

sounds psycho

[Mountain Man]

Like I said...

If you dig back though academic history, the concept of "white privilege" was based almost exclusively on personal anecdotes where someone felt like they weren't given a fair shake because they weren't white, including absurd "injustices" like turning on the TV and seeing a majority of white people as opposed to an unrealistically disproportionate ratio of non-whites. Subsequent "research" has been little more than an exercise in confirmation bias.

[Sparko]

sounds psycho

Just about everything on that list could be said by someone of any race.

[seer]

sounds psycho

sounds???

[Joel]

Regarding the terminology of "privilege":

A big problem is when people so often insist that "All white people are privileged." (Which seems racist and obviously false.) Thanks to Carpe for not taking that position.

A second problem is when it is used equivocally, in a kind of bait-and-switch. In common (left-wing) usage "privilege" and/or "white privilege" is often used pejoratively, such as as an insult. But if you press the issue, people using the term in such a way retreat to a non-pejorative definition. Thanks to Carpe for being consistent in this regard.

But then even the use of the non-pejorative sense seems a bit odd. When I have pressed people for the definition in the past, it seems that "privilege" is being used to mean "not being oppressed" (i.e. not being discriminated against). It is said that the problem is not that some people are privileged (not-oppressed) but that some people "lack privilege" meaning "not-not-oppressed". First, it seems a little odd to use "privilege" as a negative concept (lack of oppression) when it has a common connotation of being a positive concept (something good granted/added to someone). That may be a cause of confusion regarding the use of the term.

Secondly, on the other side, when there is a problem, it seems odd to focus our thoughts and language on not-the-problem. Imagine if, instead of focusing on the plight of people in one part of the world whose homes were wrecked by a natural disaster, we were to insist on focusing on how great it is to not be them, or at least framing our language and discussion in those terms. At the least, that seems kind of rude. Wouldn't it be more sensible to just talk directly about the problem? It would at least cause less confusion.

I'm guessing that "privilege" language is intended to help non-oppressed people realize the problem exists. But is that true? In practice, doesn't it just create yet another difficulty? Not only does it not solve the problem of convincing people that discrimination exists and is a problem, it adds confusion and argument regarding the terminology. You have to spend all your time trying to explain what you mean by the term, instead of spending your time trying to convince them that discrimination exists and is a problem.

[carpedm9587]

Regarding the terminology of "privilege":

A big problem is when people so often insist that "All white people are privileged." (Which seems racist and obviously false.) Thanks to Carpe for not taking that position.

A second problem is when it is used equivocally, in a kind of bait-and-switch. In common (left-wing) usage "privilege" and/or "white privilege" is often used pejoratively, such as as an insult. But if you press the issue, people using the term in such a way retreat to a non-pejorative definition. Thanks to Carpe for being consistent in this regard.

But then even the use of the non-pejorative sense seems a bit odd. When I have pressed people for the definition in the past, it seems that "privilege" is being used to mean "not being oppressed" (i.e. not being discriminated against). It is said that the problem is not that some people are privileged (not-oppressed) but that some people "lack privilege" meaning "not-not-oppressed". First, it seems a little odd to use "privilege" as a negative concept (lack of oppression) when it has a common connotation of being a positive concept (something good granted/added to someone). That may be a cause of confusion regarding the use of the term.

Secondly, on the other side, when there is a problem, it seems odd to focus our thoughts and language on not-the-problem. Imagine if, instead of focusing on the plight of people in one part of the world whose homes were wrecked by a natural disaster, we were to insist on focusing on how great it is to not be them, or at least framing our language and discussion in those terms. At the least, that seems kind of rude. Wouldn't it be more sensible to just talk directly about the problem? It would at least cause less confusion.

I'm guessing that "privilege" language is intended to help non-oppressed people realize the problem exists. But is that true? In practice, doesn't it just create yet another difficulty? Not only does it not solve the problem of convincing people that discrimination exists and is a problem, it adds confusion and argument regarding the terminology. You have to spend all your time trying to explain what you mean by the term, instead of spending your time trying to convince them that discrimination exists and is a problem.

If two people sit at a bar, and order the same beer (which I am doing as I type), both receive the same beer in the same glass for the same amount, but one has almost no head and one is 25% head. They are not getting the same amount of beer. The one with more beer has the "privilege" or "benefit" off having more beer. The one with less beer has the "burden" or "disadvantage" of having less beer. Which language you use is all about what you're focusing on. The reality is, there is a difference and one person is advantaged and the other disadvantaged.

I have two black children and that has been true for almost two decades. We have had numerous outings with our extended families and friends over those years. Many, many times the adults will be in the house and one or more of the children will go outside to play. In 19+ years, nobody has ever called the police to report "strange children" on any of the white children in my family. The cops have been called 8 times when one or both of my children were out playing alone. When I talk to the other parents in our adoption group who have adopted black children, they tell us "this is normal." They too have experienced it many times over the expanse of their children's lives, and the situation is always the same: it doesn't happen when one or more white children are out, or when white children are out WITH our black children. It ONLY happens when the black children are out alone, and it happens about 50% of the time.

A white family will never notice that they have a "privilege" or "advantage," because all they do, time after time, is let their children go out and play. That the cops might be called usually doesn't even cross their minds. A family with black children is VERY aware of the fact that, if they let their children go play out back in a strange place (e.g., a rented house being used for vacation, a family they are visiting), there is a 50/50 chance the cops will come knocking.

So are the black children disadvantaged/discriminated against, or are the white families experiencing a privilege they never even think about?

Is the glass half empty or half full?

[Mountain Man]

If two people sit at a bar, and order the same beer (which I am doing as I type), both receive the same beer in the same glass for the same amount, but one has almost no head and one is 25% head. They are not getting the same amount of beer. The one with more beer has the "privilege" or "benefit" off having more beer. The one with less beer has the "burden" or "disadvantage" of having less beer. Which language you use is all about what you're focusing on. The reality is, there is a difference and one person is advantaged and the other disadvantaged.

I have two black children and that has been true for almost two decades. We have had numerous outings with our extended families and friends over those years. Many, many times the adults will be in the house and one or more of the children will go outside to play. In 19+ years, nobody has ever called the police to report "strange children" on any of the white children in my family. The cops have been called 8 times when one or both of my children were out playing alone. When I talk to the other parents in our adoption group who have adopted black children, they tell us "this is normal." They too have experienced it many times over the expanse of their children's lives, and the situation is always the same: it doesn't happen when one or more white children are out, or when white children are out WITH our black children. It ONLY happens when the black children are out alone, and it happens about 50% of the time.

A white family will never notice that they have a "privilege" or "advantage," because all they do, time after time, is let their children go out and play. That the cops might be called usually doesn't even cross their minds. A family with black children is VERY aware of the fact that, if they let their children go play out back in a strange place (e.g., a rented house being used for vacation, a family they are visiting), there is a 50/50 chance the cops will come knocking.

So are the black children disadvantaged/discriminated against, or are the white families experiencing a privilege they never even think about?

Is the glass half empty or half full?

When I was in junior high, the children of some black neighbors used to carpool with us. One evening when I was in basketball practice, my mom was driving the two children home when suddenly the little boy points to a black woman in the car next to them and says, "I think that woman thinks I'm crazy!" My mom didn't think much of it until after she arrived home and got a call from the local police asking if she was transporting two black children. It turns out the police were following up on a kidnapping report, because why else would an older white woman have two black children in the backseat of her car? Then my mom realized that the woman in the other car must have been mouthing "Are you OK?" which the boy interpreted as a question about his sanity.

My mom was able to straighten out the misunderstanding by putting the police in contact with the children's parents, and it all worked out in the end. But where was the "white privilege" in that scenario? Some racist busy-body apparently thought my mom was guilty of kidnapping simply because my mom was white, and the children were black.

My point is that any one of us can tell stories about how we or someone we know was unfairly treated or discriminated against in one way or another because of our race, gender, appearance, perceived attractiveness, perceived intelligence, grooming habits, or any other arbitrary standard, and you know what? None of it proves a damn thing. What I get from your story is not that white people are unfairly "privileged" to not have the police called when their children play outside but that you apparently live in a community of virulent racists, and you're lucky they're not burning crosses on your front lawn. I know for a fact that that something like that would never happen in my community, or the community where my parents live.

[carpedm9587]

When I was in junior high, the children of some black neighbors used to carpool with us. One evening when I was in basketball practice, my mom was driving the two children home when suddenly the little boy points to a black woman in the car next to them and says, "I think that woman thinks I'm crazy!" My mom didn't think much of it until after she arrived home and got a call from the local police asking if she was transporting two black children. It turns out the police were following up on a kidnapping report, because why else would an older white woman have two black children in the backseat of her car? Then my mom realized that the woman in the other car must have been mouthing "Are you OK?" which the boy interpreted as a question about his sanity.

My mom was able to straighten out the misunderstanding by putting the police in contact with the children's parents, and it all worked out in the end. But where was the "white privilege" in that scenario? Some racist busy-body apparently thought my mom was guilty of kidnapping simply because my mom was white, and the children were black.

My point is that any one of us can tell stories about how we or someone we know was unfairly treated or discriminated against in one way or another because of our race, gender, appearance, perceived attractiveness, perceived intelligence, grooming habits, or any other arbitrary standard, and you know what? None of it proves a damn thing. What I get from your story is not that white people are unfairly "privileged" to not have the police called when their children play outside but that you apparently live in a community of virulent racists, and you're lucky they're not burning crosses on your front lawn. I know for a fact that that something like that would never happen in my community, or the community where my parents live.

We have all experienced times where different races in one family creates confusion. What you describe has also happened to us on several occasions. When the children don't look like the parents, people justifiably seek verification. This has nothing to do with that. This is children out alone with no parent around to compare. And it is repeatable - ALL parents I have spoken to with black children, report the same thing, whether the parent is white or black.

There are MANY places in our culture and our society where, simply having black or white skin confers an advantage or disadvantage. It can go either way - but the vast majority break in favor of people with white skin. It is not absolute - it is not universal - but many are absolutely systemic.

[carpedm9587]

I want to be clear here. No race is always the beneficiary of privilege. No gender is always the beneficiary of privilege. No ethnicity, sexual orientation, or religion is always the beneficiary of privilege. But every race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and religion experiences privileges and disadvantages that are systemic, and SOLELY associated with that aspect of their identity. These are the things I believe we should identify and weed out. I do believe that, on average, white people experience more systemic privilege than black people, males more systemic privilege than females, causasians more privileges than other ethnicities, heterosexuals more privileges than homosexuals and bisexuals, and Christians (in the U.S.) more privileges than other religions. That does not mean any one person feels that. A white, male, heteterosexual, Christian in Appalachia may have little/no privilege, while a black, female, gay, Buddhist in San Franscisco may experience a great deal of privilege.

We cannot deal with each and every individual. We can simply look for places where systemic privilege exists for any race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or religion, and ask ourselves, "is this right?" and "how can we fix it?"

[Mountain Man]

I want to be clear here. No race is always the beneficiary of privilege.

Then stop using deliberately divisive, racist, and inflammatory terms like "white privilege" which convey precisely that.

[carpedm9587]

Then stop using deliberately divisive, racist, and inflammatory terms like "white privilege" which convey precisely that.

They do to you, MM. As far as I can tell, you are the only one making this objection. That you feel a need to focus your angst on my choice of language, rather than the core message (which it seems you actually understand), says a good deal about you. I leave you to your assumptions.

[Mountain Man]

And it is repeatable - ALL parents I have spoken to with black children, report the same thing, whether the parent is white or black.

I honestly find this hard to believe. I've lived around and known people of various races all my life, and I've never heard of something like this happening.

[carpedm9587]

I honestly find this hard to believe. I've lived around and known people of various races all my life, and I've never heard of something like this happening.

what you do and do not beleive is not my concern. I know what has happened to me and those I interact with. You are free to dismiss it if you wish.

[Joel]

If two people sit at a bar, and order the same beer (which I am doing as I type), both receive the same beer in the same glass for the same amount, but one has almost no head and one is 25% head. They are not getting the same amount of beer. The one with more beer has the "privilege" or "benefit" off having more beer. The one with less beer has the "burden" or "disadvantage" of having less beer. Which language you use is all about what you're focusing on. The reality is, there is a difference and one person is advantaged and the other disadvantaged.

I have two black children and that has been true for almost two decades. We have had numerous outings with our extended families and friends over those years. Many, many times the adults will be in the house and one or more of the children will go outside to play. In 19+ years, nobody has ever called the police to report "strange children" on any of the white children in my family. The cops have been called 8 times when one or both of my children were out playing alone. When I talk to the other parents in our adoption group who have adopted black children, they tell us "this is normal." They too have experienced it many times over the expanse of their children's lives, and the situation is always the same: it doesn't happen when one or more white children are out, or when white children are out WITH our black children. It ONLY happens when the black children are out alone, and it happens about 50% of the time.

A white family will never notice that they have a "privilege" or "advantage," because all they do, time after time, is let their children go out and play. That the cops might be called usually doesn't even cross their minds. A family with black children is VERY aware of the fact that, if they let their children go play out back in a strange place (e.g., a rented house being used for vacation, a family they are visiting), there is a 50/50 chance the cops will come knocking.

So are the black children disadvantaged/discriminated against, or are the white families experiencing a privilege they never even think about?

Is the glass half empty or half full?

But it's not just symmetric point of views, because one (oppression) is a problem and the other (not-oppression) is not, right? Unless you think oppressing everyone equally is as good of a goal as zero oppression. The ideal is that all the parents can just let their kids play.

The way some people talk makes me suspect that they do think both are equally good (or even that pulling down is even better than bringing up). But I don't think you think that.

[rogue06]

We have all experienced times where different races in one family creates confusion. What you describe has also happened to us on several occasions. When the children don't look like the parents, people justifiably seek verification. This has nothing to do with that. This is children out alone with no parent around to compare. And it is repeatable - ALL parents I have spoken to with black children, report the same thing, whether the parent is white or black.

Really? In this age of mixed race marriages? Especially ones that have children from previous marriages? And especially when you add grandparents to the mix.