General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhy I don't think the phrase/argument white privilege is effective.
Yes, I absolutely agree that there is such a thing as white privilege, but most of the arguments I see putting it forth are, I think, doomed to be pretty fruitless or counterproductive. If you're struggling and white, you're likely to resent it, and feel pitted against minorities. These arguments strike me as being targeted at the upper middle classes and college students who have the luxury to entertain them. I'd bet that if you're poor and white or lower middle class, you find the white privilege argument to be off putting, and that it engenders resentment.
There has to be a better way to reach people about the racism that's endemic in our culture.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)I certainly agree that it's not an argument that is going to resonate with working class whites; rather you need to focus on how the class structure keeps both white and black people down, and how the Republicans manipulate racial animosity to keep things lousy.
That said, I don't think you should write off the value of the argument with the managerial class. The people making hiring decisions, and setting company polices for their departments or their companies are often awash in White Privilege without realizing it. And if you can wake them up to what white privilege means and how it impacts them and the people around them, than I think that can have really beneficial effects. They are, to a certain extent, the ones upholding the framework of white privilege, and it's going to need their involvement to tear it down.
I could be wrong, but those are my thoughts.
Bryant
Cayenne
(480 posts)'Privilege' implies that there is an authority that issues and revokes those privileges. "Then why not revoke white privilege" comes to mind.
TexasProgresive
(12,157 posts)are probably unaware and no amount of talking about it will make them conscious of it. One has to recognize that we all are human beings who should be afforded the same opportunities and rights. That's how it worked for me.
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)It's completely alienating and has contributed to "poor white flight" from the Democratic Party.
It basically says if you're white, you're tainted and there's nothing you can ever ever do about it, sort of like an "original sin" but without a virtuous path to redemption.
How anybody thought this was a winning tactic is beyond me. I'd wager it played some role in the 2014 election wipeout.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Lol
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)It's kow towing to people who who are "uncomfortable" that is. Sorry- no one is losing votes over it- that's a fuckjng joke.
RedCappedBandit
(5,514 posts)As a factor in intellectual/academic/policy related discussions, the concept of privilege is critical.
But when it comes down to it, all people enjoy certain privileges and face certain oppressive conditions. White privilege is one of those variables worth noting.
In the end I think you're right. Telling a white person living in poverty struggling to simply afford food they're privileged is a waste of time and won't do anything to raise awareness of systemic racism. But again, I do think that's because it is typically framed poorly - not because the concept itself shouldn't be discussed.
B2G
(9,766 posts)and it allows unthinking robots to cut off discussion while feeling extremely self satisfied with their enlightenment.
Of course I hate catch phrases in general.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)with any discussion of race, unless they are leading it, have a problem with discussions using the words white privilege.
Shocked I tell you.
NoJusticeNoPeace
(5,018 posts)They ALL (white people) have privilege like an overcoat they are always wearing they are unaware they have on.
kinda like that
Some of them get REAL resentful when you point it out...we know them by their reactions
lame54
(35,302 posts)lame54
(35,302 posts)jwirr
(39,215 posts)have it. There were many things that I did not have to face. I did not face discrimination in anything I tried to do simply because of who I was. I did end up with those who watched me pay for food with food stamps (the real thing back then) and who thought me lazy because I did not work. But of course in my case my disabled daughter helped. The idiots took one look at her and gave me credit for taking care of her.
I think there are many groups that face some of the same prejudices (usually situational) and instead of dividing us they can be used to bring us together to fight for the rights of all. From my own experience these groups include racial groups, disabilities, poverty, persons who are seen as undesirable (fat) and many other stigmas that people use against each other. Better we come together and work to end it all.
I do agree that this issue is used as a way to divide us. When I worked with the Native American's in the 70s one of the things that I learned was how the country used the issue of race to divide Native Americans and Black people. So when it was my turn to work with them I made damned sure that I did not work against their goals and become one of the dividers. One thing being poor has done is make it a lot easier to understand where others are coming from when they talk about "white privilege".
boston bean
(36,223 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)And be done with it.
boston bean
(36,223 posts)to their inequality that others don't face?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)You would receive ... if the person was being true to his/her pattern.
cali
(114,904 posts)Not very subtle but not too courageous either.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Threads discussing racism/discrimination only to raise your opinion that income inequality is the real problem.
You have a pattern of entering threads discussing racism / white privilege only to raise your opinion that, if they are to be discussed at all, it must be done in a way so as to not offend those that are being spoken to, and of.
And you (of late) have entered heterosexism threads only to raise your opinion that sexism is the bigger problem.
So yes ... you have a pattern of entering discussions that you have no personal interest in, only to state that something you have a personal interest in is always the bigger, more pressing, issue.
So run tell that when you alert and pray for a hide.
Oh ... and BTW ... I am not / have not called you a racist, though I do consider you an insensitive, completely self-centered, poster.
Number23
(24,544 posts)And this person is by no means the only one here that does this.
That's why I'm reading this OP bemoaning that discussions of white privilege are somehow worse and less productive than racism itself like:
boston bean
(36,223 posts)LOL
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)I think there are other ways to get people to understand that racism is a still a big problem. Examples and facts are one way to start.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Factual example of white privilege.
cali
(114,904 posts)such as in the JD report on Ferguson.
NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)Theoretical concepts, like "white privilege," however, are often hotly debated. A sad part of such debates is that proponents of said concepts often try to shame those who disagree with them.
boston bean
(36,223 posts)NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Are vigorously disputed by those with an interest in doing so.
NoJusticeNoPeace
(5,018 posts)privilege?
foo_bar
(4,193 posts)Speaking of expressions that make white folk cringe. How about The Trapper-Keeper of Shame? I think it's more like a guardian angel who twitches her nose to bewitch police officers and make higher-paying job opportunities appear. I guess the framing problem is that the empowered class in question can't really lose their "privilege" without that 80s Eddie Murphy movie plot, so it isn't perceived as "constructive criticism", and anyway the problem isn't privilege, it's that everyone doesn't have equal access to it. (Or maybe that's what privilege means. I like this one, "White Myopia"
TM99
(8,352 posts)that worked during the Civil Rights & ERA era?
The New Left vocabulary developed out in the 'field' so to speak. It spoke not only to academics, politicians, and the elite, but also to every day people marching and protesting the inequalities.
Today's Post New Left vocabulary is extremely insular and separative. It has developed in the halls of academe often times separated from the reality of which it speaks.
We used to speak of oppression instead of privilege, exploitation instead of classicism, large group alliances instead of being a singular ally in these struggles, consciousness-raising as opposed to calling someone out (notice how one is productive and enlightening and the other is conflict oriented just by the choice of words), solidarity instead of Positionality ("I am Trayvon Martin" used by anyone of any race or color in solidarity against abuses instead of the "I am not Trayvon Martin" meme which urged white people to not identify with black positions), the people as a whole instead of a group of folk, and finally liberation instead of safe spaces (DU'ers want people to check their 'privilege' here more than they seemingly wish to discuss actual & tangible ways to end institutionalized forms of oppression!)
This is why many of us see it as offensive, because, it is. The language has changed to be less inclusive, more exclusive, more combative, and aimed solely at my 'position' be it woman, black, gay, atheist, whatever than inclusive of all oppressed positions no matter where they fall on the totem pole of generally financial inequality in this country.
And it is failing politically and will only continue to do so because of reasons already elucidated in this thread.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)who is this "We", you speak of?
TM99
(8,352 posts)who marched for civil rights like my black father & white mother and their children, friends, other professors, etc.
We also did activism for the environment, against the Cold War & Apartheid, for medical research and health care for AIDS patients, and other progressive causes.
Does that satisfy your 'we' question?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)
Pooka Fey
(3,496 posts)This is the best post I've seen on DU all year. Thank you so much for writing this.
Agreed - there has been a huge shift in the language of the Left towards division of Americans into factions, competition, and calling-out with the consequences being that Americans are more divided than ever I remember from my youth in the 1960's - 70's.
This coincides with the abandonment by the Left and the Democratic party of issues of social justice, fair wages, unions, social security, environmental protection, voting rights (Al Gore in 2000, John Kerry in 2004), and solidarity.
Americans are much less receptive today to healing divisions, listening, and uniting into an effective political movement to combat neo-liberalism and its poisonous fruits: inequality, racism, and religious extremism.
Economic injustice is at the center of all classical political theories, but has been abandoned by the Democratic Party leadership, perhaps being seen by the political class and dynasties as obsolete in a race-to-the-bottom world of Free Trade Agreements.
My solution - a complete overhaul of the political system - repeal of Citizen's United, and a one hundred year commitment to creating a multi political party system like those in Europe - which I can't write about on DU.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Middle Class White Privilege?
cali
(114,904 posts)institutional racism. And institutional racism is more the problem.
Rex
(65,616 posts)It is insinuating that, "like ALL black people, there are poor white people that get no benefits from being white."
I don't like that statement. It seems to be of the mindset that all black people are poor and that is the reason they get no special treatment.
I see white privilege and institutional racism to be one and the same, if it takes me using the second term to get through to someone I will do so.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)It is INSULTING to all black people imo. I, as a white privileged male, have a hard time believing it's that hard a concept.
Slavery was about global disenfranchisement down to the very name of the slave. I can never comprehend that, I can only read about it and try to. It's always been about exploitation. It always will be about hideous behavior left unchallenged.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)that you never associated privilege with income ... the problem is (and check the names) those most adamant about denying/requiring a reframing of privilege, are (almost) exclusively about income ... for themselves.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Last edited Fri Apr 10, 2015, 12:26 AM - Edit history (1)
nt
EDIT - I've seen this faulty assumption that you have to have labor rights, before you can have civil rights...and that is not only wrong, but completely ass backwards.
IMNSHO.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Peggy McIntosh transferred her revolutionary studies in women studies to race. It is a whole, comprehensive, holistic concept that has income only as a very minor element of it. Income is an element of the concept only insofar as some groups are accepted by the greater society as white, and accorded the same benefits when they go up in the social income ladder. This includes Asians, to some extent, within a generation at most they will be "white." Irish, Italian, Eastern Europeans and Jews (who might be losing that status due to a rising antisemitism)
White privilege vs people of color is not just about blacks, but also about Hispanics and Latinos, and at this point immigrants from the mideast. It is about all the invisible benefits that you get for being white, even if you are poor.
Examples, if you are poor and white and have a criminal record, you have a far better chance to get a job than if you are black, or hispanic, or middle eastern with no record, and middle class even with a college degree.
You might have heard this just about African Americans, but the concept is far more expansive.
here is some reading, this piece is good as to the origins of it.
Peggy McIntosh, a women’s-studies scholar at Wellesley, started writing about it. In 1988, McIntosh wrote a paper called “White Privilege and Male Privilege: A Personal Account of Coming to See Correspondences Through Work in Women’s Studies,” which contained forty-six examples of white privilege. (No. 21: “I am never asked to speak for all the people of my racial group.” No. 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.”)
Here some on latinos and that empty knapsack
And for muslims
What you are making is the classic mistake of forgetting that this concept is not about money, but the social construct of race. Income has a tad to do with it, since it allows people in the targeted community to become whiter as far as neighbors are concerned, since they are the good (insert minority here) that succeeded against all odds.
And yes, poor whites have it hard... we know this, but do poor whites fear when their children go out to the corner store to buy bread? How about fearing getting stopped over and over and over again by the police? Are their art forms targeted by the state? No. But all this is relevant to both black and brown people.
I understand why some folks do not want to have these discussions. I really do. But that does not mean people might be right. It is hight time we as a society actually face to the monster (slavery), because as long as do not, this shit will only change in how it expresses itself, and it will not change at a structural level.
For PoC this is about white supremacy, and that is also a social construct, but a direct consequence of slavery. After sitting down with plenty of my neighbors who are PoC and mostly listening, I get it, trust me, I get it. And it is not the easiest of conversations to have either.
Edit, had to fix my quotes...
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)"Okay, I'm privileged. So what now? What should I do about it?"
Agree.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)For evidence of this all you have to do is review the gazillion or so threads here on the subject and see how quickly they dissolve into pissing contests over the word itself rather than anything productive which could possibly come from the concept. It's also used quite frequently to remind people that their opinions can't possibly matter because their target has some sort of privilege. The same people can generally be found aggressively promoting their opinions on matters where they have privilege.
olddots
(10,237 posts)a privalage becomes a habit that is hard to detect and hatd to treat .
bvar22
(39,909 posts)and that is the 1% against all the rest of us.
When the Working Class & Poor realize WE have more in common with each other
than we have in common with the 1% and their mouth pieces in Washington,
we can have change.
As long as we continue to let them separate us by race, eco status, religion, gunns, and the other politics of division, the 1% will gladly keep looting and finding new manufactured outrages to keep the 99% divided while "they" rake in the profits.
boston bean
(36,223 posts)Yeah, right!
bvar22
(39,909 posts)...would go a long way to reducing the tensions between the factions.
This has been proven in many Latin American countries over the last 15 years
where the People have been able to wrest their governments away from their 1%ers.
through near bloodless Ballot Box Revolutions. The success depended on the coming together of many factions to oppose the REAL enemies.
boston bean
(36,223 posts)
BainsBane
(53,038 posts)racial or otherwise. The fact is we are much more economically advantaged than the majority of the people on the planet, but I have seen people here deny that fact and even become angry about it. They want to talk about the 1 percent, but don't acknowledge that their own percentile in global terms is pretty high. I think it gets down to the fact people feel entitled to everything they have and resent what others have yet don't like to think for a minute about how their economic position comes at that cost of great exploitation around the world. Nor are very many at all grateful for their relative advantages.
A lot of white people don't like to hear about privilege because they don't want to be reminded of the ways in which they are advantaged in comparison to people of color. Most men don't like to hear about their advantages vis a vis women, and the wealthy don't like to hear about their privilege vis a vis the poor. There is one common denominator in all of this: Everything I have I deserve; not only do I deserve that, I deserve more. It comes down to basic selfishness.
And then we have the talking points about "division" reiterated again in this thread. What they mean is they don't want to be reminded about the concerns of anyone but themselves. They see the world as revolving around people just like them and become angry when women and people of color speak about their own experiences. We see it on this site all the time, and I have not once posted a thread on women's issues or feminism without being confronted directly with it.
The opposition to discussions of privilege is a clear determination to not only maintain their own privilege, but to silence any speech that questions that privilege. I know many African Americans don't give a shit that white people don't like to be reminded of their privilege. I am with them on that point. I don't give a shit if it makes you uncomfortable or you find it ineffective. In fact, if people find the discussion uncomfortable, they are the ones who most need to hear it.
Class and race are not the same thing, and grown adults shouldn't have to be reminded of that point over and over again. I have also see class issues evoked in exclusionary ways here, with some having the gall to argue that the concerns of "women and minorities" are only social issues, or even "Third Way." Some have dismissed LGBT rights as concerning "only a very small percentage of the population." It's a determination to exclude as illegitimate the concerns of any but themselves. In the face of a growing effort to exclude any but the privileged few just like them from consideration in the body politic evidenced in political discussions here, I think the last thing people should be worrying about is that someone posts a thread about white privilege. The fact is racism is endemic. Its not just practiced by police forces. It's evident in discussions like these, as African American posters on this site know all too well. I don't give a shit who doesn't want to hear about it, particularly when they have made clear that they see my life and those of the majority of Americans as inconsequential compared to their own political interests. The problem is the sense of entitlement and exclusionary politics, not that people of color have the nerve to use words you don't approve of.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)this is going on:
Nothing is changing regardless of what we call it. It's arguably gotten worse in the last 35 years. 
boston bean
(36,223 posts)when it was just black people, women, lgbt, jewish persons, etc experiencing income inequality.
Funny now that white men are feeling the pinch, we gotta make sure the argument is framed to satisfy them and fight for them as well.
Ok, I will fight for income equality for EVERYONE, but don't ask me to ignore all the other issues groups face that are added on top all those reasons. Their income inequality isn't just based on the 1%.... It because of discrimination.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)Your reply doesn't match my post
boston bean
(36,223 posts)LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)I can't match what you're saying to anything in my post
when it was just black people, women, lgbt, jewish persons, etc experiencing income inequality.
Funny now that white men are feeling the pinch, we gotta make sure the argument is framed to satisfy them and fight for them as well.
Ok, I will fight for income equality for EVERYONE, but don't ask me to ignore all the other issues groups face that are added on top all those reasons. Their income inequality isn't just based on the 1%.... It because of discrimination.
"White men are feeling the pinch". .. I have no idea what this is supposed to mean.
You must have mistaken my post for one on general income inequality. Reread my graphs. I'm making the point that black people are discriminated against economically.
Fuck sake
Response to LittleBlue (Reply #26)
Name removed Message auto-removed
elias7
(4,021 posts)The discussions on the white privilege topic seem to focus on black and white, especially when quoting crime and job related statistics. Asians don't seem to fit this opportunity/institutional racism model as neatly.
NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)
kelly1mm
(4,734 posts)
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)BainsBane
(53,038 posts)You're not going to understand the ways in which class, race, gender, sexuality, and other subject positions influence American society and our positions in it. The popular discourse about Asians doesn't conform to their actual standing in US society, however, the notion that there is only one kind of other also misses the point. There is a good deal written by scholars of Asian American studies on race if you're interested. If you really want to know more about the question you asked, you should read some of that literature.
elias7
(4,021 posts)Not being literate on the subject, I am probably rehashing old covered ground, but I was merely pointing out that the privilege threads do tend to be one dimensional, ie focused on black and white.
I see a complex dynamic of class, race, gender, sexuality, religion, intellect, emotional intelligence, social intelligence, and plenty more categories that combine as uniquely as fingerprints for any and every individual, to the extent that it is difficult for me to segregate privilege merely by a simple racial formula.
I don't think anyone can honestly dispute the deeply embedded racism that dominates the cultural dynamic. At the same time, it seems like defining privilege requires a scorecard. I get 2 points for being white, 1 point for being male, but 1 point off for being Jewish, but gain a half point back because I try not to act Jewish, 1 point for moderately good intellect and literacy, but points off again for sub par emotional and social intelligence. A half point for middle class background, but a half point off for being raised in the sterility of the suburbs, but kudos for having risen to a higher tax bracket and have a job of some prestige. I have a big bald spot, but am not obese; I am middle aged, so I have learned a few things that help, but opportunities, health, and beauty are fading. I am not materialistic, and I don't like crowds, Have chosen a rural home to the city, and well, i could go on.
i see major disparity in privilege even within every single family, let alone this country. I see huge disparity in privilege when comparing anyone in this country with those in most or many parts of the world.
It is just a very muddy issue to me, so a simplified framing of our complex societal dynamic as white privilege seems shallow, but probably an effective way to reach the consciousness of those unaware of how good they have it.
cali
(114,904 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)great start cali!
kwassa
(23,340 posts)Like Benghazi, your argument was unconvincing before, and it not more convincing now that you repeat it.
Again.
What it really comes down to is that YOU are alienated by the white privilege argument, which isn't really hard for anyone to understand.
Which is: A white person has privilege over a black person in identical circumstances.
It is not comparing the position of poor whites to wealthier blacks. The notion of privilege needs to be explained in that context. To compare a poor white to a black person in different circumstances is to NOT UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT.
boston bean
(36,223 posts)put off they are by the term.... I suspect it may be them personally who feels slighted by it.
cali
(114,904 posts)and I've said that repeatedly.
I just love you little cuties who think making shit up is just fine and dandy.
boston bean
(36,223 posts)unless it is in some mystical fashion everyone can agree upon.. ok....
cali
(114,904 posts)No, I clearly didn't say that either. duh.
boston bean
(36,223 posts)Yes, I absolutely agree that there is such a thing as white privilege, but most of the arguments I see putting it forth are, I think, doomed to be pretty fruitless or counterproductive. If you're struggling and white, you're likely to resent it, and feel pitted against minorities. These arguments strike me as being targeted at the upper middle classes and college students who have the luxury to entertain them. I'd bet that if you're poor and white or lower middle class, you find the white privilege argument to be off putting, and that it engenders resentment.
There has to be a better way to reach people about the racism that's endemic in our culture.
cali
(114,904 posts)boston bean
(36,223 posts)I summarized...
PS read my entire post.... as you are making incorrect declarations. I never said you said to never discuss it what I said was this:
unless it is in some mystical fashion everyone can agree upon.. ok....
cali
(114,904 posts)and do provide some evidence that what I said was incorrect. It may be a revelation to you, but opinion is not fact.
boston bean
(36,223 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)some of my posts:
The more I read about Benghazi, the clearer it is that there's no there there, but republicans with their endless hearings by multiple committees hope that the issue is just too confusing form Americans and that they can distill it into Benghazi bad democrats bad their fault dead Americans.
So far, it's not working, but they are managing to keep it alive.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022825241
Benghazi? Benghazi? They're filibustering Hagel over Benghazi? What the everlasting fuck
does Benghazi have to do with Hagel's confirmation.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022374192
Here's a shocker: Pig Paul takes his anti-Hillary Benghazi show on the road- to Iowa
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022827148
And I have no problem owning my white privilege. It's been apparent to me for a very long time. I agree that a white person has inherent privilege in this society. That is not my point.
I don't like bullying. I don't like people making up shit. good job on both. congrats on that. You didn't even bother to check on that accusation about Benghazi. You just blithely made it up.
kwassa
(23,340 posts)It is more about beating a dead horse. Another analogy.
cali
(114,904 posts)seabeyond
(110,159 posts)his position. and it will never be effective, regardless how it is discussed, while he defends his position. we still need to talk about that privilege and entitlement for those that are thinkers.....
Sheldon Cooper
(3,724 posts)difficult concept to grasp.
Alittleliberal
(528 posts)
Blanks
(4,835 posts)For proof: see this thread.
Sure, on average white people are better off than black people on average, but as my statistics professor pointed out: "if my feet are in a bucket of ice, and my head is in the oven, on average I'm confortable.
The thing is that there are plenty of examples of white people discriminating against other white people. The Irish were brought to this country as slaves and the Okies in California escaping from the dust bowl were widely discriminated against. The problem is that people are jerks, but white people hardly have the monopoly on being jerks, and they don't direct that 'jerkiness' exclusively toward black people. For the most part, the folks that are jerks are jerks to most people.
Bickering about it doesn't do any good. I know that there is an unreasonable amount of abuse toward black people. I also know that it isn't me that's doing the abusing. Browbeating the people who would be your allies if you weren't browbeating them seems unwise to me.
I'd rather someone have a plan to move us all forward by getting along, rather than a long drawn out discussion trying to make the folks that might be perceived as being a little better off, feel guilty (I guess that's the goal).
I wish people were nicer to each other, regardless of race, creed or national origin.
kwassa
(23,340 posts)Racism is about an institutionalized system that holds black people down, both in the past, and as a part of historic continuity, in the present. It exists in completely depersonalized forms.
All discrimination against white people of any ethnicity was historically temporary, as they were all eventually seen as merely being another white person. Irish and Okies were absorbed into the rest of the white population. Black people will never have that privilege
You would do well to read up on white privilege, you're statement clearly shows you don't know the racial history of the US, in either past or present form, or the concept of white privilege itself. If you think white privilege is about making people feel guilty, you don't get it.
Blanks
(4,835 posts)Making it more complex does nothing to make it less divisive.
There is still discrimination of white people toward other white people. I know this is true because it's not difficult to observe. Observe the interactions between trailer park folk and non-trailer park folk sometime, and you will see that this is the case. Not a damn thing temporary about it, not a damn thing to do with skin color. Yes, people are discriminated against based purely on appearance, but there are more variables to discrimination than the color of one's skin. There are people who put themselves above others and are jerks toward those that they perceive are lesser than themselves. This is my personal experience, why would I research it?
I could research ancient aliens and find a whole bunch of people that believe that there were ancient aliens, does that make it true? No, that proves that there are a lot of people who believe in ancient aliens. It's the same with researching white privilege. I don't need to research white privilege, I know that it exists, it's not so much a question of whether it exists or not, but what do you think I'm gonna be able to do about it.
Knowing that it exists does nothing to make it a less divisive issue. If you think that the purpose of bringing it up is not to make people feel guilty, then what is the reason for bringing it up and telling me that I'm ignorant.
What is it that y'all are trying to accomplish?
kwassa
(23,340 posts)Only race is permanent. White trailer park people can become white middle class and no one will know their history. Black people will always be black. It is a visual thing.
The reason you need to research white privilege is because you don't know what theory of it is. Somehow you feel entitled to opine on it without understanding that theory. This I don't understand.
The reason to bring the theory of white privilege up is not guilt, but awareness, which might allow you to empathize in a more understanding manner with those people of color you interact with in your life. They see the world quite differently than you, based on their life experience, an experience you can't possibly have without being black.
Blanks
(4,835 posts)In fact, I have family members of color. Perhaps those who continuously bring up white privilege should research their audience.
I've lived in poor inner city neighborhoods, and have sent my kids to school in classrooms where they were the only non-black child. I was in the military and had many non-white friends.
I have plenty of awareness of the problems. The solution to the problem will not present itself by reminding me and others like myself how awful it is. The solution to the problem is not: get people to empathize. The solution to the problem is education. Not educating white people about white privilege, but inner city education programs that allow young black kids to go to university and study engineering, science and law etc.
Education is the great equalizer despite any assumptions you make about how people won't change their attitude toward people of color - ever. In my experience educated intelligent people get respect regardless of color.
Sure, there will always be racist pigs, but it's more damaging to the effort of trying to convince people to empathize when you assume that the person that you're having a discussion with is an ignorant racist pig - than it would be if you treated would be allies, with some level of respect.
The discussion about the term white privilege is divisive, you've done nothing to convince me otherwise. Perhaps it would help to simply rename the theory.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)So you start with, "But I have black friends. . ."
Then you move to this thing where the solution to racism is not with white people, but with people of color. If they don't want to be victims of racism, they should become doctors and lawyers! Wow, what a solution. (/sarcasm)
Two problems. First, people of color who are doctors and lawyers actually are still victims of racism. No, they don't get respect regardless of color. And they still get pulled over very frequently by police, in fact driving the cars the cars people with advanced degrees drive, they might be even more likely to get pulled over all the time. They still face employment discrimination - a person of color with a degree does not have the same opportunities in hiring and advancement as a white person with a degree. There is lots you are intentionally not seeing here.
Second, it is never the responsibility of victims to do something (particularly something expensive and that takes years) to avoid being victims.
Blue_Adept
(6,399 posts)And you immediately go dismissive on him.
C'mon. Discussion board. Discuss things. Don't go all dismissive when someone is trying to explain themselves and doing so without snark or silly pictures.
Blanks
(4,835 posts)Which is not to say that it doesn't happen (I know it does), but it doesn't happen everywhere. I know black judges, black prosecuters and quite a few black attorneys (because my wife is an attorney).
While there are a lot of situations where people are discriminated against purely because of color, there are also situations where black people must hold certain positions. There are several judgeships and state job openings that must be held by black people. I realize that this is not enough to counteract the massive number of prejudices against black people, but when you evaluate micro-situations, what you see is that the 'theory of white privilege' doesn't always apply. Which is why I suggest that it be renamed.
As a social theory it seems specific to the American experience. Im sure there are situations even in America where it is a disadvantage NOT to be a member of the dominant race. For example, I expect in Asian communities being white does not give one an immediate, automatic advantage. It is for this reason I suggest that 'the theory of white privilege' should be renamed to something like 'the theory of the dominant race privilege'. That's really what it is.
Because there are situations where the privilege of being white is not extended (the inner city for example). It is the term itself that I think is not helping the 'effort'.
Your deliberate misrepresentation of my position on education is a bunch of crap. It is my position that we need to spend more on education in poor urban neighborhoods. Reduce class size, increase individual attention per student etc. I was not blaming the educational short-comings on those with the short-comings. That's a straw man you constructed.
When I lived in the inner city I interacted with a lot of bright young children and I know that they went to the same middle school as my son. The teachers acted more like prison guards than teachers. They yelled at the kids to stand quietly in lunch lines - like it hurts something for the kids to talk in lunch line.
We need to invest in these kids' education, not yell at them. That's my position, not the position that you assigned to me and then tore down.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)I specifically said that there are, and that they are still victims of discrimination. Getting an education doesn't keep you from being a victim of racism.
And yes, being white still gives advantages in inner city areas, with police officers, teachers, and shop owners. And it still gives you an advantage when you send out resumes looking for jobs.
I misunderstood your entire position re education but you still clearly said
Education is the great equalizer despite any assumptions you make about how people won't change their attitude toward people of color - ever. In my experience educated intelligent people get respect regardless of color.
That education solves the problem of racism, and it clearly doesn't
Blanks
(4,835 posts)Education isn't going to solve the problem in a single generation, and I can see how you could get the impression that's what I meant by what I said. I think affirmative action programs like the ones that I mentioned above move us in the right direction, but yeah, there's still plenty of racism. I'm not disputing that. However, while there is plenty of racism, that doesn't mean it's everywhere, and I think using the phrase 'white privilege' is divisive and makes the situation worse, stirs up resentment where none previously existed.
...and again, it's kind of specific to the American experience. I expect that the Japanese have some privilege in Japan, and I'm certain Genghis Kahn didn't believe in white privilege. It's the term 'white privilege' that I think is divisive, there is a privilege extended to the race that is dominant in a society/culture, there is no doubt that the construct exists. Is it always 'white'? I don't think so. How can someone posit a theory unique to the American experience and expect us to embrace it, study it, and respect it as though it's a legitimate theory, but give it a name that seems like a personal attack?
My only issue is with the name, perhaps if we called it TTFKAWP (the theory formerly known as white privilege) we could pronounce it 'tutta fuck owp' (or something) and then we could all work toward fixing it.
m-lekktor
(3,675 posts)you aren't denying white privilege exists you just don't agree on it how it usually is presented for reasons you have stated. i believe many on here are being purposefully obtuse so they can imply passive-aggressively, or straight out, that you are something you are NOT as a way to get back at you for being a Hillary critic.
marle35
(172 posts)their reason for pushing the term. The cause of white privilege is oppression of POC, so why not focus on that instead?
There might be a good reason to focus on privilege, but that hasn't been explained. Or it has been explained very poorly. As a result, discussions surrounding the term ultimately derail.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)in academic discussions, also these discussions tend to involve the judicial system, police violence in particular, as well as access to schools, universities, general services, health care, access to the courts... I could go on. The list is long.
The problem is that most of those very much in depth discussions don't happen at places like DU. And the concept is truly at heart, about race concepts, and how we have racialized portions of society. It is also a direct challenge to the pull yourself by your bootstraps, Horatio Alger myth and meritocracy which is at the heart of the American Mythos.
At it's heart it is also about slavery. Why those discussions get derailed often at places like DU. Funny though, we have had these in depth conversations on Facebook and face to face. If you have a university near by, find out if they have access to journals on sociology, political science, law, history and the rest. You will find plenty of very clear material on it.
Orrex
(63,219 posts)rather than to invite discussion.
In pretty much every conversation I've ever seen or heard about "white (male) privilege," a great many of the responses are invariably along the lines of "I can't afford shoes, and you're telling me I'm privileged?" This in turn steers the discussion toward the easier topic of the particulars of that person's privilege, rather than to the larger, more complex and more important underlying issue.
Often, when this is pointed out, the result is a disparagement of the white (male's) "feefees," which generates further defensiveness and distracts further from the real subject.
I don't have a great and succinct alternative to propose, but since the issue seems to rest on disparities of race, gender and class, perhaps the answer can be found there as well.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)it's to remind them how privileged they are and how they have been coasting through life on the easiest difficulty setting. Because the subtext is, with all of those advantages, they must have really screwed up to get where they are.
Now, bearing in mind that plenty of white DUers are broke and/or unemployed, is it really any wonder that the "whites are so privileged" threads are controversial?
XemaSab
(60,212 posts)One of the things that I enjoy about being white and presenting as middle-class is that people give me the benefit of the doubt. There have been a few instances where I felt watched, but those instances are rare.
My most important awareness of my own privilege is that if I call the cops, or if the cops pull me over, or if I get in an accident, the cops are usually friendly and not suspicious. Yes, there was one instance where I was pulled over and treated like a suspicious character, but again, there have been what? 10 or 20 other times where I've called the cops, been pulled over, or had some interaction with them, but in general they're polite, friendly, and not inclined to be hostile towards me.
AS A WHITE PERSON, I GET THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT.
Response to XemaSab (Reply #85)
Name removed Message auto-removed
ismnotwasm
(41,998 posts)What the actual fuck?
Kali
(55,016 posts)
Rolando
(88 posts)I'm white, male. The cops I have had trouble with have been another race or gender. Did I cause the trouble? I don't think so. My best solution is to do everything I can to avoid any contact with legal authority. That even includes not calling when something suspicious is going on in my neighborhood.
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)I'm not upper middle class. If you've studied the concept of intersectionality, class comes into play.
Other than that I find posts like this to be one giant tone argument.
Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #86)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Number23
(24,544 posts)
ReasonableToo
(505 posts)...if it was coined by the right, it's a genius way to divide people and coax whites to the GOP side. Many whites don't think that they are getting anything special so they can discount the concept out of hand as nonexistent. They can say that PoC want some special treatment. "It's reverse racism", they claim. Many otherwise fair-minded people get defensive because they don't see privilege and lean toward the right since the right is the side that says white privilege doesn't exist. If the phrase was coined by the left then it's an unfortunate gift to the right for the same reason.
I think what people see as "privilege" is really the way everyone should be treated all the time. Because whites are treated this way and PoC are not, one could say PoC are "disadvantaged" but who wants to acknowledge that their normal way of life is being "disadvantaged"?
PoC don't want to think of themselves as disadvantaged and whites don't want to think of themselves as privileged. Yet the reality is that whites and PoC are not treated the same. They do not operate on a level playing field in most instances.
This country has threads of racism woven through it's history if one would only look. From slavery, of course, to laws against property ownership to laws against voting. Even though the racist laws are pretty much removed by now, the damage of institutional racism has been done. Even though the racist laws are pretty much removed, the spirit of those racist laws remain in law enforcement, the justice system, employment decisions, drawing voting districts, etc. Too many people are still raising their children to hate other races.
Equal civil rights for all - black, white, hispanic, native american, LGBTQ, atheist, muslim - no one should be disadvantaged.
Bonus: The other phrase I don't like is to "tolerate differences" I prefer to RESPECT differences.
delrem
(9,688 posts)The phrase accurately describes reality in North America, in the countries of the former British Empire, and it describes a reality that should be dealt with.
I knew that white privilege existed before ever hearing that exact phrase. I used the phrases "institutionalized racism" and "institutionalized sexism" to get my meaning across. But tomayto tomahto, it still tastes the same.
I'm absolutely against any attempt to eliminate these words and phrases from our vocabulary, from our discussions, because these words and phrases are accurate and pinpoint the global nature of the problem. Someone might *deny* that the problem exists, that's a different thing than agreeing that the problem exists but disallowing the terms necessary for discussing it. I much prefer to deal with an outright denier, than with someone who tries to control the debate by denying the *words* used to describe the issue.
I've seen the technique, controlling the debate by denying the terms used to describe the issue, all over politics. I've seen people laugh at my use of the term "corporatism", in order to eliminate my thoughts, my input, regarding a problem that I know exists. I've seen it in all kinds of cases - and the technique is a favorite of "alpha personalities".
treestar
(82,383 posts)to POC. It's saying "we are still victims." Bad white people will actually embrace it, thinking they deserve the privileged status. Good white people will feel sorry for POC (and that means they don't see them as equals).
There is a black POTUS, FFS, grab this chance to say yes we are equal! Or superior in some cases, i.e., President Obama. Quit emphasizing the victimhood - this is the point in history to turn that around!
It should be: hey white people who think you are superior, suck it! You have been proven wrong.
And this is not meant as "condescending." White people are involved, so their opinions might actually be helpful. Skin color does not mean you are always being mean. If this is "telling us how to handle it" it's just a suggestion.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)and the more comfortable we become with the conversation. It is why I really like seeing discussions on white privilege. You are right that it often causes resentment. That is a true feeling and one doesn't stop thinking about something when it has an element of emotion attached to it. That thinking part is good even if the initial interaction caused resentment. Eventually the conversation becomes commonplace and people become more knowledgeable about the actual topic being discussed.
Example. When I was growing up civil rights with respect to LGBTQ was never discussed. It was a taboo subject in our family. Last thanksgiving it was actually brought up. Interestingly enough even those with a more conservative bent joined in a positive way. Those in my family claiming to be conservative do seem to have very respectable thoughts when it comes to many social issues. Over the decades of my life the conversation has gone from taboo to an open discussion at a family gathering. Yes, a person or two wish it would have never been brought up. Out of over twenty people at the gathering I would say that is a huge change. Mainly because the conversation has become more commonplace.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)Fortunately, that's about all we need from a phrase.
romanic
(2,841 posts)but the arguements around it (on here and online in general) just amounts to taunts and kindergarten bullshit. If you bring up the topic to "bait" people into arguments and claim them to be trolls, then you're not making the case for you opinions. You're just being an asshole to strangers online in attempt to be "snarky". It's boring and doesn't amount to jacksquat in terms of solving anything racial.
