Is the term "White Privilege" a racially divisive term

[pipoman]

being used to describe discrimination against non - whites?

22 votes, 2 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Yes, the term "white privilege" is a racially divisive term used to describe non - white discrimination
	7 (32%)
	No, I don't find the term "white privilege" racially divisive
	13 (59%)
	"white privilege" is different than 'non - white discrimination'
	2 (9%)
	2 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[boston bean]

1. wha??

[demmiblue]

2. Anyone who chooses the affirmative is probably either a wingnut or a dumbass. n/t

[Igel]

39. The question isn't whether the term is accurate.

It's whether it's divisive.

If you go up to a many a white man and say he's benefiting from "white privilege," his hackles will rise and there will be (a) animosity and (b) less willingness to talk.

If it's a black man who goes up and tells him that the hackles will rise higher and there'll be even less willingness to engage in constructive dialog.

That makes it divisive. It divides instead of uniting.

You or I may like the term. We may find it useful. We may find it accurate. But I tend to think that it divides more than unites. Instead of helping to get to a solution, it's a cudgel, a weapon. There are times when it also hides what's happening at least as much as it describes, but the use of useful terms to hide fuzzy thinking isn't the topic.

[Squinch]

78. By all means, we must not raise the white man's hackles.

I think that what this means is that the white man you speak of needs to grow up. I don't think it means we need to ignore the experience of an entire group to avoid making the white man you speak of uncomfortable.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

3. I think you could word this a little more

bewilderedly if you tried.

[boston bean]

5. I think the poster may be trying to ask

if the term white privilege is discriminatory toward white persons.

Although, I am not totally sure.

[Heidi]

8. Ya think?

[boston bean]

11. or if it is reverse racism???

but didn't want to come out and ask it like that.

It's strange wording.... to say the least.

[Heidi]

14. Sometimes you just have to shake your head.

:sigh:

[A-Schwarzenegger]

10. I think the term

"while pickled" may be involved.

[boston bean]

12. This early in the morning?

[A-Schwarzenegger]

13. It's Saturday Night!

[Heidi]

16. No rest for the wicked,

I've heard.

[Scuba]

4. If one is a racist, and doesn't like being called out for it, the answer is surely "yes".

[Heidi]

9. :thumbsup:

[Tanuki]

21. Amazingly, someone actually alerted on this!

On Sun Mar 2, 2014, 05:57 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

If one is a racist, and doesn't like being called out for it, the answer is surely "yes".
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4589289

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Calling DUers who voted differently racists. Personal attack.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Mar 2, 2014, 06:09 AM, and the Jury voted 0-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: What, now we are alerting on personal opinion?
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Uh, who is being personally attacked?
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: If the shoe fits, perhaps the alerter should wear it. The alerted post wasn't directed at anyone in particular, as far as I can see, and makes a valid point.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Scuba]

23. Perhaps someone who doesn't understand basic logic.

[RC]

56. Some people can't tell the difference between reading something they don't like to read, and a

personal attack.
Hence the alert.

[pipoman]

100. For the record, I didn't alert on this or any post in the thread..

[1awake]

6. There's no check mark for finding the term

"white privileged" a piss poor wording that makes people who use it sound like douible standard a**holes?

[Heidi]

7. Only in that debates about it seem to divide the white people I want to know

from the white people I don't care to know.

[Squinch]

79. Boom!

[Number23]

80. Ha!!

[laundry_queen]

84. Truth. nt

[Democracyinkind]

15. Is the term "rich" socially divisive? nt

[Douglas Carpenter]

17. It is better to convince than to ventilate. I don't doubt for one second that white privilege is

alive and real. I am not sure that using the term helps in increasing awareness about the matter though. One analogy I might give relating to another issue - I happen to have very strong opinions regarding the Israel/Palestine conflict. If I attempted to argue my point of view using language that I am absolutely certain is true that expresses what I am convinced beyond a doubt to be true - but puts those I am trying to convince on the defensive, what good am I doing for the cause I support?

[pintobean]

19. That's the way I see it.

Many non-racist whites will take it it to mean guilty by association, or that they are being judged by the color of their skin.

The poll is worded very poorly.

[RC]

57. That is my take on this whole subject on DU and why I have a problem with it.

And the people who keep pushing it here, as having a disrupting agenda.

[KansDem]

18. Yes...

...if you want to concede that we are protected by Constitutional "privileges" and not "rights."

I'm a white male and I believe in Constitutional protections guaranteed by rights, not privileges. And that applies to all Americans.

If you are a person of color and subject to discrimination, it's because your rights have been violated, not because I'm privileged. Savvy?

If you want to emphasize "privilege" then let's reword the Constitution. This undertaking would involve a major rewording of the Sixth Amendment alone:
The right privilege to a speedy and public trial
The right privilege to trial by an impartial jury
The right privilege to be informed of criminal charges
The right privilege to confront witnesses
The right privilege to compel witnesses to appear in court
The right privilege to assistance of counsel[86]

Feel better?

But fear not, it appears Kansas is already moving in this direction:

Your guide to Kansas elections.

Secretary of State Kris W. Kobach welcomes you to Vote Kansas! This website guides you through each step of the Kansas election process. We hope it will be useful as you exercise your voting privilege and responsibility.

That's Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach explaining how to exercise your privilege to vote.

[kwassa]

50. There is a difference between rights and privileges.

A privilege is simply an advantage that doesn't rise to the level of violation of another's rights, or a violation that can be proven. This privilege is given by the dominant white society to other whites.

Whites have these privileges in that they don't receive the level of suspicion that minorities due in similar social settings. While a civil right might not be substantially violated, the privilege still exists, and still discriminates.

[bettyellen]

55. which is exactly why it is a very useful word.

[Quayblue]

62. right on

[RC]

58. That's it, absolutely.

If you are a person of color and subject to discrimination, it's because your rights have been violated, not because I'm privileged.

[Scruffy Rumbler]

20. Depends on how it is used.

I acknowledge there is white privilege in this country. That is a fact.

It becomes racist when it is hurled at you by other posters when they disagree with your opinions.

[magical thyme]

22. Is "male privilege" a gender-based divisive term?

Being used to describe discrimination against women?

[gollygee]

24. I feel very confident

that he would say yes.

[Starry Messenger]

25. +1

[magical thyme]

36. the reason I asked is because I just struggled with a jury duty...

such that I changed my answer 3 times trying to decide my response.

I found it helped to reframe my question, and "Male privileged" was one of the frames I used.

The other frames I used were "Able privileged," "Straight privileged" and "Pretty privileged." That gave me 3 frames I am "privileged" and 2 in which I am discriminated against.

I concluded that "White privilege" and "Male privileged" are divisive terms, but mainly because they are memes that have been beaten to death here at DU.

People are confusing "factual" with "divisive." The fact is white people are privileged within our society. Males are privileged. Able-bodied people are privileged. And pretty people are privileged.

Statistics and studies show that they consistently get more opportunities, better opportunities, better rewards for less work, and less punishment for rule-breaking. And in the case of pretty people, even their parents favor them over the ugly duckling kids, and will even blatantly punish the ugly kids for the pretty kids misbehavior.

[kwassa]

45. great post!

the privileges you point out are all true.

[quinnox]

26. Not a fan of the term. It is clumsy,

and can easily be misinterpreted. I would prefer "white favoritism".

[Nye Bevan]

27. Personally I think "racism" is a good word. (nt)

[Waiting For Everyman]

28. Well the other poll was an absurdly skewed push poll,

which is why I wouldn't vote in it or kick it to say so, but in this one I have no idea what the third choice means so I'm ignoring it.

(I absolutely agree of course that racism and racial discrimination exist, and should be ended. But the privilege terms are, and will remain in my book, not only contrived nonsense but more than that, damaging and unfair to large groups of innocent people. I don't call that justice or progress, or liberal. There is more wrong with it, but that's enough reason to go into.)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024575218#post288

[Fumesucker]

29. Using academic terminology in a non-academic setting can lead to misunderstandings

Even with a term as simple and non-threatening as "theory".

"The theory of evolution."

"Conspiracy theory."

[Daemonaquila]

30. Stunned by this thread.

"White privilege" is a perfect term to describe the benefits conferred automatically to anyone with white skin in this society, their taking it entirely for granted, and questioning people's "hurtful"use of the term on a predominantly white political discussion board. Please see the Doonesbury cartoon about bankers with hurt feelings for a perfect example.

[ScreamingMeemie]

35. This trouble that people have is also why this will probably remain a predominantly white

political discussion board, unfortunately.

[Number23]

81. Nailed it!

[Lizzie Poppet]

31. The concept is absolutely real and valid; the term itself is terrible.

As others have pointed out, the term is far, far too easily misinterpreted. It carries connotations to a reasonable person (that might not be familiar with the academic usage) that are not only likely to be inapplicable, but which are undeniably confrontational. That's counterproductive.

[pipoman]

32. My sentiments exactly.

[kwassa]

41. White privilege is always applicable, though. The issue of misinterpretation in on the interpreter.

[Lizzie Poppet]

63. Not, I'd argue, when it's the more intuitive interpretation.

The term "privilege" in this sort of context carries a lot of negative connotations (think: entitled assholes with Thurston Howell III accents, to use a deliberately exaggerated example). That's the sort of connotation that someone unfamiliar with the academic usage of "white privilege" will very often read into the usage. Most of those readers will not, obviously, actually be some sort of entitled 1%'er type, and will quite naturally reject the appellation (and quite likely any arguments associated with it, that being human nature).


If the point of the usage is verbal aggression or suchlike, then it's a great usage. If the point is actually doing something to redress the problems associated with white privilege, it's a terrible, counterproductive usage.

[kwassa]

68. I don't agree.

I don't think it is counterproductive to discuss white privilege to redress problems at all, and I don't know why you think it is.

The entire radical notion of this concept is that one is privileged while not feeling the slightest bit privileged. That is the entire point of considering this notion.

[Lizzie Poppet]

72. That's not what I said.

"I don't think it is counterproductive to discuss white privilege to redress problems at all, and I don't know why you think it is.

I don't know why either, considering that I said nothing of the sort. I consider such discussions to be extremely valuable.

What I said was that using a term that is extremely likely to be misconstrued (because the intended meaning is much less intuitive than a far more confrontational and aggressive interpretation) is counterproductive. Those are seldom "discussions." They're two people talking past each other, on the verge of an argument. That's what's counterproductive.

Another poster in the thread suggested the term "white favoritism." In an academic sense, that term is probably less descriptive and accurate. It is, however, a lot less likely to be interpreted as an insult or as combative. It's more likely to have the listener actually consider the matter.

[kwassa]

74. then start the discussion with privilege, and what it means.

11,000 teachers in the huge school district I work in will be talking about white privilege, part of the years of diversity programming we go through. White privilege is the focus of this year's trainings, which go on throughout the year.

Not rocket science. Anyone can understand privilege if it is explained to them. Intuitive means nothing if is not an accurate descriptor.

[pipoman]

92. Words mean something

They have definitions both common and less. Common definitions are those understood and applied by most people. By alienating even 1/3 of those whose attention you wish to attract, I suspect the actual number is much higher, you lose the effectiveness of your message. There are countless accurate yet divisive terms which can be used in place of non divisive terms. Most people who are actually trying to gain support for an idea choose to bring together their audience, not divide it.

You can go on pretending that the term isn't divisive, this simple poll shows otherwise. Don't care about the feelings of those who feel the term is divisive? Guess what? They still believe it is, and you lost 1/3 of your audience before you even open your mouth.

Now the real question. .why is it so important to you to alienate 1/3, when your message could be so easily applied in nearly unanimously accepted terms?

[kwassa]

95. How is your poll more valid than the poll where 93% said that white privilege is real?

Reconcile those two things.

you worded your poll to get the response you wanted.

Whether or not it is divisive is not important, compared to whether or not it is real.

You set the wrong standard.

[pipoman]

96. The number in the other poll

Would have likely been unanimous if the term 'racial discrimination' had been used.

Depends if you aspire to actually have a positive effect on a problem or if you are just playing with words.

[kwassa]

97. I think you are the one playing with words, in this instance.

[pipoman]

99. 1/3 of respondents in the poll disagree apparently. .

[TheKentuckian]

89. Who is the audience? You can blame the audience all you like but they aren't who gets the downside

but rather the beneficiaries of the status quo so what exactly is on them, a few more decades of privilege?

[kwassa]

91. Funny how that works.

Speaking as a white person, there is no downside for a white person to not engage in a real racial discussion. Avoiding it is safe.

That is just the way it is.

[TheKentuckian]

104. Exactly. Putting up barriers to even grasping the situation is counterproductive by definition.

It sucks to have to placate but that is privilege.

If you have a message it must be digestible rather than reflexively rejected by the audience, that is basic communication.

I think the entire concept is a tough sale by virtue of human nature anyway, the attempt to sell someone something that not only doesn't benefit them but something that actually reduces their relative standing is tough going, it is crazy to cop the "fuck em if they don't get it" on top of it unless there is no inclination toward solutions.

[Mojo Electro]

33. How could it not be?

How can saying "People of X race have an easier time at life than Y race" not be considered divisive?

[kwassa]

40. Even if it is true? We shouldn't speak the truth?

[RobinA]

87. Same Reason

you don't walk up to someone and say, Gee, you're ugly. It makes them not hear anything else you have to say. The idea of communication is to get your point across.

[Boom Sound 416]

94. That

Is an 'ends justify the means argument'

And

Let's be a little real. It's 2014 in America. If you got the cash you can get the access.

Many folks before us paved these ways and America is still America after all. Money talks.

[Iggo]

34. Nope.

I'm going to assume you understand the definition. So, no, Unless you want it to be, or you need it to be, then it's not.

[Boom Sound 416]

37. I would imagine

Those suffering from white guilt are those who are also recovering Catholics who look for some kind of solace in the concept of white privilege

[kwassa]

44. what a bizarre statement.

I can't even understand what you are trying to say.

Privilege has nothing to do with guilt, by the way.

[Boom Sound 416]

54. I think the two are closely related.

Almost symbiotic.

[kwassa]

71. Not related at all, really.

Guilt comes from doing something that one knows to be wrong and harmful, and to feel responsibility for that wrong and harm..

Privilege requires no knowledge at all, though one can have knowledge of privilege, something we are trying to drive at here. One can be privileged by doing absolutely nothing, as in the example of white privilege. It is not unlike being born into aristocracy, for instance, even though there might not be a family fortune to support that. Likewise, white privilege might be severely constrained by other factors.

To be born into white privilege doesn't require guilt from anyone, as it was not individual action that created this situation. We do, however, have a collective responsibility to eliminate privilege if we believe in true equity of opportunity.

[Boom Sound 416]

93. Nice post

You wrote,

"Guilt comes from doing something that one knows to be wrong and harmful, and to feel responsibility for that wrong and harm.. "

The 'something done' is to have been born swm.

You say privilege requires nothing therefore no guilt is assigned. Privilege by your standard ends at realization. What of the SWM who is aware of the privilege? He has realized what he's done and what he's perpetuated (by merely existing) and therefore in an attempt to end it must define it.

Ok, so how do we define it? Well, it's called white privilege.

All I'm really seeing there as a defining characteristic is race.

So what's the OP asking? Is the term racially divisive? How can't it be?

And what of our protagonist? He's long gone and millions of us have followed learning from him the terrible truth. And so we are the guilty. The only guilty people who also bare no responsibility.


That can't be right.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

38. I don't think so, and I don't recall it getting a lot of attention until recently

...and that's a good thing.

It got me to thinking about how I, a white male, can get a pass on things my black co-workers wouldn't think of doing, either at work or behind the wheel.

Good lesson to learn.

[itsrobert]

42. No, you forgot "White MALE Privilege"

[Nye Bevan]

51. Heterosexual white male non-disabled full-head-of-hair privilege (nt)

[RC]

64. Hey now, I resemble that outrage.

However I am a senior citizen, so there's that discrimination against me, in my favor.

If anyone understood what I said, there is hope yet. If not, maybe you should work on it some more.

[MrScorpio]

43. No, it's simply a matter of fact nt

[ismnotwasm]

102. Exactly

[Comrade Grumpy]

46. Meanwhile, in the real world...

State legislatures are up to no good and the Republicans still control the House.

And the DU wankfest continues.

[NYC_SKP]

47. It has increasingly become a highly charged term and...

...is misused more often than not.

It can be used in an academic, neutral way, but also in an insulting, divisive, even racist way.

It is not a yes or no question.

[Blue_In_AK]

53. +1

Some people do use the term as a cudgel.

[cthulu2016]

48. Yes, it is. But that is hardly decisive.

Almost any term that starts by identifying a race is racially divisive in some sense.

"Black church" is a racially divisive phrase, in that it highlights racial difference and implies a lumping together of things based primarily on race.

But it is also a sensible term for describing a real institution.

A thing can be unavoidably 1% divisive by its nature simply by trying to describe something racial, or 100% divisive and outright poisonous.

I would give "white privilege" about a 25% on that scale. Not a terrible thing, but a little more divisive in practice than might be optimal.

[Nye Bevan]

49. If all whites could just acknowlege their privilege 3 times a day, every day,

racism would soon be a thing of the past.

[kwassa]

52. You might be right.

I know you meant this sarcastically, but it might indeed have that intended effect.

[ZombieHorde]

59. I personally don't think the term is racially divisive,

but the term seems to lead to miscommunication more often than some other terms.

"Global warming" had this problem, so some people started saying "climate change." This new phrase did not seem to help very much because some people are against the whole concept of climate change for political reasons.

Because of this, I am not convinced a new term for "white privilege" would actually do very much. However, white privilege is discussed much less frequently than climate change on TV and internet news, so that would be an advantage to any new, replacement term.

[TransitJohn]

60. No. To believe there is no white privelege is to believe there is no racism.

And those two beliefs are fucking stupid.

[etherealtruth]

61. ^^^ THIS ^^^

[pipoman]

65. What's the difference between the two?

[TransitJohn]

66. You're either being

deliberately obtuse or are startlingly ignorant. Either way, I'm not getting suckered in. Take care.

[pipoman]

67. I have no idea why you wouldn't answer that

question..unless there is no difference and some would rather use a divisive term when it isn't necessary.

[kwassa]

85. What do you think is divisive about this term, since you started this OP?

and how is is divisive in the first place?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

69. amen. nt

[Number23]

83. Thread. Winner

And your comment about the OP either being obtuse or ignorant is just icing on the cake.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

70. people who like to pretend white privilege doesn't exist

are simply blind to their own privilege. which of course is convenient for them.

[AverageJoe90]

73. Yes, unfortunately, it kinda has become that way.

BTW, just so you know, I realize full well that this is not what the creators had in mind; I believe it was originally a thought experiment of sorts, perhaps of the "step in their shoes" type variety, as it were. And, to be honest, it's actually kind of fascinating as a thought experiment. But as a literal application, however, it doesn't work, and hasn't really ever worked, all that well. The evidence for the latter, I'm afraid, isn't hard to find if you're willing to look, and know *where* to look.

[el_bryanto]

75. It is after a fashion

But it is descriptive as well, and therefore useful. It highlights the different experiences that members of each race have, and in that sense it is racially divisive.

Bryant

[Warpy]

76. We're already divided

and white privilege is one of the reasons.

Nice try at putting the cart before the horse though.

[Deep13]

77. more concerned about whether or not it is accurate nt

[Corruption Inc]

82. Add any racial term to the word "privilege" and it becomes about race

instead of the word "privilege". The people who do it know full well what they are doing too.

[Puzzledtraveller]

86. yep

now, what is the aim? I think it's to assuage their own feelings of guilt however and whatever they may be. IMO.

[bobduca]

88. only to the willfully ignorant

[TheKentuckian]

90. Other: Ask the audience.

[Baitball Blogger]

98. Well, excuse me for telling you that your skirt is showing.

[The Straight Story]

101. Just about everyone has privilege

Anyone who does not agree with that is blind to their own.

[MO_Moderate]

103. The term was created in order to divide

It's use does nothing but create resentment.