My problem with "white privilege"....

[daleanime]

It seems to imply something that should be taken away from some one, instead of a right every one should have.



Although truthfully I can't think of a better term for it.

[pipoman]

1. How about discrimination?

I am all about eliminating discrimination.

[daleanime]

3. Definitely.....

better.

[whistler162]

20. According to some on DU

white privilege exists because a person is white. So you are saying that because a person is white they are bigoted racists who discriminate?

[pipoman]

26. I know that there is institutional racism

and discrimination. I don't know why we would fight racism and discrimination with racist monikers which imply one race gets "unearned advantages" when nobody gets "unearned advantages", some just don't receive their earned advantages.

[noiretextatique]

76. but some people do get unearned advantages

its called wealth. bush the junior is the poster boy for unearned privilege.

[pipoman]

90. So this example is indicative of white people in general?

I'm thinking there are 1% ers who are every race.

[noiretextatique]

96. of course...but you will never see a black bush as president

you do see a barack obama. sure the 1% have a smattering of blacks and latinos...they probably make up 1% of the 1%. and yes, i do believe the bush example is indicative of white people, in general. white skin often trumps education, skills, experience, etc.

[pipoman]

100. deaf, dumb...

And blind...

[catbyte]

27. You don't get it at all. White people have inherent, invisible advantages that people of

color don't have. For instance, my mom couldn't go into some places in northern Michigan because she was Ojibwe, and was followed in stores when she was allowed in them. I never had that problem because she married a guy a few shades lighter than her and I can pass for all white. Whites aren't bigoted because of this, they just have advantages they don't even have to think about if it is not pointed out to them--me included, although I am over half Ojibwe.

[FLPanhandle]

51. I have to disagree

Growing up a dirt poor white boy, I couldn't go into places either. Not because of my color, but because of my clothes, shoes, poor look.

I never bought into white people inherently having an advantage because of my experience growing up. My experience has been people with money have the advantage.

Like your anecdote of your mother, I have some of my black buddy, who's father was a military officer, who could go places I would have been shoo'ed out of.

[catbyte]

53. Sorry, I don't buy it. Class plays a role, but even an elegantly dressed dark skinned person

would more likely be followed & be thought of as a drug dealer or other sort of criminal. If you dressed well, they wouldn't give you a second glance. Class bias is also destructive, but it's not the same as racial bias. How else do you explain the case of the Harvard professor being harassed & arrested on his own front porch because the police officer didn't think "his type" should be in that neighborhood? You can deny there is bias & institutional racism all you want, but you are then part of the problem and not part of the solution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Louis_Gates_arrest_controversy

[FLPanhandle]

54. Not denying there is racism

Also pointing out there is classism and your comment "Class bias is also destructive, but it's not the same as racial bias." is wrong. It's just like racial bias.

[catbyte]

66. But you fail to appreciate that to stop it from happening to you, all you need is a change

of clothes. People of color don't have that option. And you really don't see the difference?!?

[FLPanhandle]

67. No difference

You think poor white people should just stop being poor and dress better to cash in on all their "white privilege"?

You really don't see how insulting and out of touch that attitude is? Being poor is in this capitalist mad society can be as permanent and as destructive as racism.

[gollygee]

68. You know, people of color can be poor too

In fact, there's a relationship between the two because of the history of racism in our country - African Americans are much more likely to be poor. So for those who are poor, they lack white privilege AND lack class privilege.

Lucky for you, your kids, grandkids, or great grandkids might be able to climb out of poverty. Racism is generational and can't be escaped.

[FLPanhandle]

69. Maybe it's the word "privilege"

If all that white "privilege", can't supply food, clothing, heating/air, etc or any other tangible benefit, then it's nothing.

Class privilege provides something tangible (homes, security, better education, etc.) and it can be quantified. So called white privilege, in my experience, hasn't provided shit.

The word privilege implies a tangible benefit. Telling someone who is poor, close to losing their apartment, can't feed or provide clothes to their children they are "white privileged" because maybe their descendants might be better off, it's a convincing argument.

Again, it's just my opinion why the whole "White Privilege" argument doesn't resonate in the real world.

[catbyte]

70. You're quibbling about semantics. Fine. I obviously can't help you see the difference, I won't try.

Have a nice day.

[Rhiannon12866]

91. I think it also depends on location.

I'm in New York and there were children of color in class with me from the beginning. It never dawned on me that there was any difference because nobody ever said anything. To me, everybody was a different color, no two quite the same. But when I spent a family vacation in the South at age eight, early '60s, I couldn't help noticing there were separate bathrooms at a car wash we visited in Georgia, and I could read. I asked about it, but none of the adults in my family answered me. Children who were growing up there certainly knew because they experienced it.

[pipoman]

107. Yep,

One if my most dear friends and mentor was 74 at his death a few months ago. Probably 6 months ago we talked about this at lunch. He told me that growing up in Kansas (a free state) was difficult as a young black man in the 1950s. He didn't receive the opportunity white people his age received. He was never threatened by the klan or other extremists. His wife OTOH grew up in Tulsa. She experienced lynching of a friend's father. She was mistreated by white people. He (sadly) accepted his place and ultimately did well for himself and his family. He died a beloved member of a 80% white community. His friends were entrepreneurs, lawyers, doctors, and common people. He said that he was so happy to see that his grandchildren were unbelievably close to having the same rights as whites.."..it ain't perfect, but we've come miles".

[Rhiannon12866]

110. I agree that we've come miles since then

It still shocks me to think that this kind of thing took place during my lifetime. But it shocks - and saddens me - even more to know that there are still places, and not that far away, where people still feel this way, let alone act on it.

[H2O Man]

88. Short-cuts to rational

thought are so unattractive.

[Skittles]

2. yup, no one is advocating taking anything away

white privilege means inequality - being judged by one's character instead of the color of your skin is the goal of trying to make people aware of privilege - where equality exists, ALL people benefit

I do know what you mean though.....I never liked the term "gay rights" as all it means is gay folk getting what straight folk already have

[daleanime]

4. True...

and a good way to look at it.

[pipoman]

5. Inequality

So considering the objection of many to the term "white privilege", why wouldn't we use the term "inequality" and skip the objections?

[daleanime]

9. Not a bad option.

[gollygee]

11. Do you see the privilege or entitlement or both

inherent in discussing with another white person what language should be used when discussing racism, and saying, "Why wouldn't we say that instead?" as if it's the decision of white people regardless of how people of color feel about it?

[daleanime]

14. Yes, discussing racism in any way.....

isn't something a white person should do.

[gollygee]

19. That's obviously not what I said.

Choosing the language is not something white people should do within their own group does not equal "discussing racism in any way isn't something a white person should do." But go tear down that strawman if you want, I guess.

[treestar]

21. how to force a group within it self not to use certain language

is a conundrum to be sure.

You can get white liberals to agree to let nonwhite people to decide the language.

Problem is right wingers. I can explain white privilege to them all day and they will still dodge it and claim affirmative action means the nonwhite people get the jobs. They've convinced themselves they are the victims. (or they take that stance, not admitting what they really think is that white privilege is just fine and logical, or is earned).

[pipoman]

30. No, you can't get all white liberals to agree,

Many white liberals are actually educated and refuse to call something by a factually incorrect name with a concocted definition simply because a few wish to do just that. So now you have a good portion of liberals who disagree with the use of the term and most conservatives who disagree. You will spend the next decade wasting public discussion time trying to sell this term instead of finding solutions to problems created by the acute issues of racism and discrimination. ..terms most everyone can agree apply. It is dumb.

[pipoman]

29. wrong

White people will choose what language will be used if they are expected to participate in the conversation. If you wish to spend all of your time arguing semantics you will insist this inaccurate term be used, if you wish to actually find solutions to the problems of racism and discrimination you will skip the argument over semantics and go straight to the issue at hand. It is those who really don't want solutions who insist on arguing semantics.

[gollygee]

50. It is not an inaccurate term

It's a term you don't like. Sociologists agree upon the term, and they're better authorities on its accuracy than you are.

If white people expect to rule over the anti-racism movement even to the point of managing what words are used in it, they aren't looking for any solutions to racism. They're participating in it.

[pipoman]

57. It is inaccurate if one looks beyond a made up academic

Definition to the actual meaning of the words being used.

Again you can see just in this largely liberal setting that many oppose the use of this term. If one really cared about solutions they wouldn't insist on semantics which offend and look for words that bring cooperation. Duh101.

[gollygee]

60. "made up academic definition" . . .

OK now I know you're not here in good faith, so I'm out.

[pipoman]

72. Of coarse you are...my way or the hiway as usual

[TM99]

63. Not all agree.

Some argue directly against it.

http://shetterly.blogspot.com/2013/08/how-privilege-lost-its-meaning-or.html

Others suggest it does not go far enough.

http://harvardpolitics.com/united-states/privilege-leftist-critique-left/

[gollygee]

65. OK so not all agree

"Generally agree" then.

[pipoman]

73. Nope...

[gollygee]

74. Yeah

There is general agreement among sociologists about the language. There are those who disagee, but of course there are far-right universities (similar to Bob Jones University) and there are sociology profs there too.

[pipoman]

86. What they agree on is that there is

Unequal treatment that has a racial component. Nobody I know would deny this. Nobody in this thread denies this. Now you can call this what ever you wish. If you want people to understand the concept, why wouldn't you be considerate of how you are going to market it. It is the same as marketing a candidate, a bill/law, or a candy bar. Why would anyone who actually wanted positive results on the issue of inequality want to piss off those who are needed to make those positive change real...whether that portion of the population is 50+% (in my opinion) or 5%. No, those trying to sell this are either marketing imbeciles, or they are trying to derail the process.

And yes the term "white privilege" was defined in the context you are using it relatively recently in academia. I believe it is inaccurate based on the definition of the word "privilege". A lot of other people object as well, not to the idea of inequality, to this ridiculously divisive name you and others insist on affixing to it.

[treestar]

83. thought provoking

from that link

Privilege Theorists complain that the “privileged” rarely notice their privilege. The flaw is not with the “privileged” but with the theory: Where white people are a majority, they don’t notice white privilege for the same reason Thais don’t notice Thai privilege in Thailand. Being part of the status quo is not a privilege. Being treated better than the status quo is a privilege.

In the US’s most recent social struggle, the fight for GLBTQ rights, no one argues that serving in the military or getting married are privileges. We argue that they are human rights which every human deserves—and that continues to be the winning argument.

[notadmblnd]

93. I have to agree with you on this

people can talk til their blue in the face, but until they act, nothing will change.

True story: My husband and I were in Toys R Us one day standing in line to make our purchase. In front of us was a white woman paying for her purchase with her credit card. She pulled it out, the cashier swiped it, her purchase was approved and she went on her merry way.

Our turn in line came, my husband pulled out his credit card to pay for our purchase, the first thing the cashier did was ask him for ID. Well having the personality that I have, I threw a shit fit and demanded to speak to the manager. I wanted the double standard explained to me. Do you know, my husband just about dragged me out of that store all the while assuring the store employee that everything was ok, that he was glad that he was asked for ID?

The only difference between my husband and the woman at the register before him besides gender, was color. Now I was annoyed at both of them, the store employee for their subtle discrimination policy and my husband for accepting it.

I did let it go because he asked me to, but I felt that he just didn't want his white wife embarrassing him by making a scene in the store.

[pipoman]

97. I couldn't agree more...and would argue for a stranger if I saw this happen

I am willing to argue for equality. Around 2 years ago the husband of a woman who works part time at the restaurant I manage was in a motorcycle accident. It was low speed but he broke his leg. He speaks broken English but is in this country legally raising his family working two crappy jobs as is his wife, sent his daughter through nursing school and has a son on the local football team. Anyway when the ambulance arrived the ems guy told him, "you'll be ok, go on home". He said "my leg is broken" and showed the medic. The medic told him he would be OK to go home. He called his fluently bilingual daughter who happened to be 3 blocks away. When she arrived the medic told her he should just go home. She lost her mind. Told them they needed to take him to the hospital. They reluctantly did. He had 4 hours surgery that night.

All of this is a violation of policy for accident victims. I and several of my coworkers and patrons wrote letters to commissioners and the ems administration. My wife wrote a complaint to the hospital emergency services vp (she works there). He received excellent service at the hospital and a letter of apology from the ems.

Another worker was stopped for driving while Mexican. She was taken to jail because she didn't have her insurance card in her car. She is very quiet and kind hearted. The officer charged her with resisting arrest. ..so unbelievable I couldn't believe it. She said she went quietly and didn't know why she was charged this way. I called the prosecutor and explained how she contributes to our community, is loved by many residents, and was harassed for being Mexican. A week later she received a letter from the prosecutor dropping the charges.

This shit pisses me off. Doesn't matter the race. Unequal treatment isn't acceptable.

That said, the term "white privilege" is offensive to me, I believe it is inaccurate, and I'm not going to respond well to its use. I believe that my rights aren't privileges. If others rights are violated I will fight for them.

[notadmblnd]

105. I'm not going to talk/argue about what people want to call it.

I'm going to stand up when I see it and I'm going to have a shit fit and say something about it as I've always done.

But you know what? Just me speaking up is an example of this advantage/privilege. In the incidence with my husband, I felt like I could/should speak out against it. He felt he could/should not.

[pipoman]

109. Also true. ..i don't view it as privilege or advantage

I view it as exercising my rights. I also acknowledge some people fear or have been taught to know their place...and do so quite justifiably. This is sad.

[pipoman]

28. If you want a non divisive term which will encourage cooperation

You won't antagonize those who you need to cooperate. The term "white privilege" may be fine in an academic environment, expecting to population to embrace it is futility and a monumental waste of time. Not to mention wholly inaccurate from a definition standpoint.

Was it white people who decided not to use the term "negro" and instead use the term "black"? Was it the white population who decided not to use the term "black" and instead use the term "African American"?

[gollygee]

49. I think the white community followed the African American community on those

which sounds more like how it should go.

If someone needs language that makes them feel good in order to cooperate, they aren't really cooperating. It isn't about them, and if they don't get that they're not allies.

[pipoman]

55. Nonsense

It is no different than selling a product. They're selling a product called cornmeal slurry chips. It will die on the shelf. Call them Doritos and people will buy them like mad.

start from a position of opposition and spend all of your time calming the opposition down, or start from common ground an leap forward. It is truly duh101.

[treestar]

61. What about trying to deal with other whites though?

I have some youthful male white acquaintances I feel are bordering on being racists. Being fond of them, I don't want that to happen and want to steer them away from it. Three white liberal females they are related to try to argue the point with them - the history of AA in the country, slavery, Jim Crow laws and the effects on blacks today have gotten some traction. They know they are privileged in that they are told by their elder relatives often how lucky they are (to be middle class ).

This kind of semantic thing and making it a point to say their feelings don't matter at all don't seem like anything that is going to help. Racism is a negative feeling and changing that feeling might need to take their feelings into account. Why not? What's so bad about that?

[gollygee]

64. The issue is that the whole anti-racism movement doesn't have to change its language

Last edited Tue Sep 2, 2014, 03:40 PM - Edit history (1)

to accommodate people "bordering on racism." There would be no anti-racism movement if the terms and issues were determined by them or chosen based on how they make them feel. They need to be educated to actually move away from racism, not have anti-racism efforts moved closer to where they are.

[treestar]

75. What difference does it make who uses what language

or even who determines it? The goal is to eliminate racism, not to argue about words. Are we just trying to feel superior to people we think are racists? And then we need them to stay racist so we can have that feeling.

[gollygee]

92. You don't think it makes a difference

if white people take over a discussion of racism and overrule the language used by people of color? You don't see how that's evidence of privilege right there?

It isn't about anyone feeling superior to anyone. Privilege fits the situation - if one person has a negative, someone else comparitively has a positive, and I explain upthread why that's useful.

[treestar]

98. But then the white people have privilege

So of course they take over the discussion.

It's the white people who are the privileged, who are the racists, therefore, the white people are the ones who need to be less racist. They shouldn't be racists, but they are. So the goal should be reach out in such a way as to get them to be less racist.

It seems it worked better Dr. King's way, as we seem to be getting stuck. It works better when nonwhite people relate what happens to them, a good number of white people will start to get it. Focusing on the white people themselves and their privilege is making it harder than it has to be and lets the white people make it about them. (Who me? I grew up poor and had to work for all I had really hard, etc., how can anyone say I'm privileged?)

But when you tell the story of how you are profiled in a store, treated differently, required to jump through more hoops (like the lady in the checkout line in the link below) - you get somewhere. The white person can relate to that and say hey that's unfair.

[gollygee]

99. I feel like I've responded to this basic position over and over again in this thread

But I would also point to post #6, about the value of seeing it as privilege. Very few white people see racism as being about them, but statistically it has to be about a pretty good number of us or it wouldn't still be here. To keep wording it in a way where we can all say, "Oh racism, yeah that's bad, but it has nothing to do with me" doesn't help rid the world of racism. We have to see that even if we don't want it to affect us, if we want to opt out of racism, we can't because it was attached to us when we were born as privilege just as it was attached to people of color when they were born. So long as we are all pointing our fingers at someone else and saying, "They'll have to deal with it - this isn't about me," it will continue to exist.

Yes, the concept is challenging, but I really think it's a good and worthwhile challenge, and the difficulty white people have with the language leads to more discussion within the white community, which I think does more good overall than making the wording feel good would do.

[noiretextatique]

80. exactly, gollygee

thanks for saying it.

[Boom Sound 416]

7. Hmmmm

That's a thought provoking take on the subject.

Good post.

[Boom Sound 416]

111. What do you think of the concept of

Majority privilege.

Or for that matter national privilege.

I think a consistency could be found nation to nation regardless of ethnicity, but more to majority rule.

[gollygee]

6. I think

it's supposed to show that race affects our lives too. It isn't just something that affects the lives of other people. People of color are affected negatively in our society by race, and white people are affected positively. I think people don't like to think of themselves as positively affected by their whiteness, but I feel strongly that we are. I, as an affluent middle aged white woman, am more likely to be trusted, considered an authority, or hired for a job than an affluent middle aged African American woman. Those are just three examples but they're huge. But white people receive better medical care, get through gatekeepers to receive services more easily, are treated better within the educational and criminal justice systems, etc. It's all over. It isn't our fault, and we don't need to feel guilty for having these privileges, but I think it's only fair to acknowledge that our lives have been made easier by being white. If racism affects person A negatively, then it is comparatively affecting person B positively. We aren't given a chance to simply opt out of the whole racism system. As others are discriminated against due to it, we are over and over again discriminated for.

[daleanime]

8. That's true.....

no one with eyes can't help but see it. Anyone who can handle basic statistics can see the results.


I just don't like the way it gets framed. There has to be more 'productive' terms that we could use.




PS-agree with you completely.

[gollygee]

10. Well

I have seen a few people say they want more "productive" terminology, but that seems to mean in at least some cases that they want language that makes them feel better. I guess by productive they mean that it will make other white people feel better. I just don't think that's the most important factor to this whole issue, and I think too many white people (not necessarily anyone here at DU) want to have it be more comfortable so they don't have to think about it or deal with racism - they want to opt out of the whole discussion. I don't think that's healthy, or that we should enable that. I like the term white privilege because it does make people think and wonder and discuss and consider. It forces us to wonder how racism affects us. I find that more productive than using language white people find easy.

[daleanime]

13. Well, I guess we're going to disagree......

because one of the reasons I dislike it is because I feel it shut down conversations instead of starting them.


And no, it's not because it makes me 'uncomfortable'.

[treestar]

22. Is it necessary they should feel bad about it?

I don't get anywhere with conservative whites that way. It is true they don't want to feel bad about it. Must they?

[gollygee]

23. They don't have to

That's up to them. And I never said they had to feel bad. Just that their feelings shouldn't be the determining factor in what language is used.

[pipoman]

35. if you want their cooperation you will not shut them down

With idiotic insistence on inaccurate terminology.

[mercuryblues]

41. dead on

And by demanding that the terminology be changed is white privilege, in and of itself. It is their feelings above all else that needs to be placated.


Not to mention that even if the terminology was changed, there would be some people that will object to the new terminology. And so on.

[Skittles]

12. absolutely right

I've always known it but.......some people need to be reminded and the clueless outright deny it

the same is true for male privilege

[MisterP]

15. hey, I'm old enough to remember when white privilege was just called racism!

[daleanime]

17. Me too.....

[pipoman]

38. And most white people acknowledge racism and discrimination exists

"White privilege" OTOH will be a hard sell, and what is the point?

[Scootaloo]

87. well, the trouble is...

Say "Racism" to a white person, and they think of the klan burning a cross, or skinheads seig-heiling on the side of a curb. While yes, that's certainly racism, it's actually a really small slice of America's racist pie.

The majority of racism in America isn't flashy or loud, and so doesn't register on the "radar" of the people who aren't taking the hits from it. You pass by a copy of a magazine with Serena Williams on the cover, and it probably doesn't strike you that the publisher has lightened her skin by about five shades. You watch a show like "The Wire" and you don't getthe "blacks are dysfunctional" message underlying the series (whether it's intentional or not). Maybe you even see the words "Affirmative action' and believe soething is being taken away from qualified white people - I've seen that from self-professed progressives. Or maybe you think "black-on-black crime" is a subject worth talkling bout, while 'white-on-white" crime doesn't even enter your thoughts for a moment?

Nobody blames you or holds it against you - maybe they hold your apathy against you, but apathy doesn't make you a ba person, just... unaware. And that's what the discussion of white privilege is about, to show and demonstrate where and how white people are privilged over people of color in our society. becuase if you just say "It's racism!" thje response will inevitably be -always is - "hah, hah, silly black people, always playing the race card! That can't possibly be racism, because _________!"

Don't believe me? Go look through DU's history with regard to Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman. DU. This place, a progressive, liberal, democratic messageboard. A very strong group of people who were very adamant that race was not involved, that the 'race card' was being played, and - my favorite - "Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are race-hustling to make a buck!" and oh my, the shit said about that poor young woman Jeantel - but no matter what it couldn't be rcism because racism only comes in the most extreme and blindly obvious forms.

[pipoman]

89. So we are concerned about the use of the word "racism"

Because of the assumptions they already have about the word, but wish to disregard and diminish the demonstrated reaction by a sizable portion of the population who have heard the term?

[Rex]

16. Bias?

[daleanime]

18. ........

[jamzrockz]

24. My mom used to say

if everyone is special, nobody is special. The same goes for white privilege, if everyone has it, nobody will have it. So it really makes no difference how you want to describe it. Either taking it from everyone or giving it to everybody, it makes no difference since both methods gives the same outcome.

[OneGrassRoot]

25. I find when using the word "advantage," people get it more readily. n/t

[Heidi]

31. I would like to ask you to consider how white privilege can be used to level the playing field

for those who don't have it. It's not that anyone wants to take anything away from anyone. White privilege is something we white people do have, and it's a tool we can use to combat bigotry.

Would you take a few minutes to watch this video*? (Good morning, dalenime! )

*With thanks to DUer JustAnotherGen for making me aware of this video back in January: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024379495

ETA: This video makes clear that even looking white confers a degree of privilege that can be used to combat bigotry.

[JustAnotherGen]

33. Thanks Heidi for posting

to me - time and again - this just nails it.

Hopefully the OP will understand - BOTH women in this situation were black, related, of the same socio economic background -

But one appears caucasian.

[Heidi]

34. Good morning, you!

I'm heartened whenever I see your username.

[JustAnotherGen]

36. Good morning to you too!

And psssssssssst - seabeyond was the person that tipped me off.

[Heidi]

37. Y'all are conspiring to make me smile.

PS: I edited my post to add:

ETA: This video makes clear that even looking white confers a degree of privilege that can be used to combat bigotry.

[JustAnotherGen]

39. I would agree

As well as degrees of 'color' can make a difference. However, 'colorism' within the black community needs to stand alone unless . . .


White America wishes to address that fact that this is very deep and imposed on black Americans (acceptable appearance) and that it at times meant financial and personal success as dictated by the Dominant Culture. Hence - needs to stand alone - because unlike you? A lot of folks aren't willing to 'see' the nuance.

[treestar]

78. Wow, I wonder if that checker was specifically taught

to do the full set of checks on black people? Probably not. She probably simply skipped it for the white people.

Also noticed the white looking person and remembered her after seeing her a few times when she'd seen the black lady more times.

[bettyellen]

106. very likely that instruction was dog whistled to her, whether it was other employees or - like me-

by the manager who insisted I holler for a "cappuccino" when I was to spy an AA coming in the store. In NYC, in the 80's.
If Macy's and Barney's NY does it to AAs buying high end designer accessories, you'd better bet it's more the rule than the exception in this country.

[gollygee]

108. This is a perfect example of privilege:

"I wonder if that checker was specifically tauht to do the full set of checks on black people? She probably simply skipped it for the white people." So doing a full set of checks on black people = racism, and "simply skipping it" for white people = white privilege. It's the other side of the same coin, and it has the same effect on the world.

[3rdwaydem]

32. It's.particularly dumb and derogatory term that assumes all members of a certain group enjoy a

uniform privilege. There has to be a better term to address the real manifestations of institutional racism in those instances where it is still found.

[mercuryblues]

42. sure

and when new terminology is used, there will be people objecting to that as well.

[3rdwaydem]

44. Perhaps so but, can we not try and come up with something more precise?

[mercuryblues]

46. I don't

feel the need to change the terminology, so who is the "we" you speak of? As I stated up thread, Wanting to change the terminology, just to make a segment of society feel better is in and of itself part of the privilege as defined. Why should my feelings be considered more important than the ones who deal with this on a daily basis? No concern trolling from me.

[DustyJoe]

52. yes terminology makes a difference

Group generalizations rarely enjoy transmitting the actual message they attempt.

ie: When I see the continued term of 'white people' this and that it loses the impact of the message because of the terminology. I know when terms such as 'brown people', 'black people' 'indian people' etc etc are used that the writer is usually shamed in their use of generalizations of the indication of talking about 'you people' not 'my people' or even just 'our people'.

When I see reference to the 'you people' meme, I usually just go to the next thread.

[treestar]

81. I don't recall objection to the times when it was seen in terms of

the opposite, that is, prejudice against nonwhite people.

Is there a goal of getting white people to be less racist? They are the ones who are the racists (oddball exceptions aside). So why is putting the argument or terms in a way they'll respond the way we want a bad thing?

[noiretextatique]

79. what term do you propose?

what term do you propose to describe the privilege that is associated with being white in america?

[arcane1]

95. How about "advantage" and "disadvantage" instead?

[JaydenD]

43. A must read on white privilege: What My Bike Has Taught Me

I found this posted at DU a while ago and saved the link, and coincidentally I sent it off to a friend just yesterday and reread it.

http://alittlemoresauce.wordpress.com/2014/08/20/what-my-bike-has-taught-me-about-white-privilege/

What My Bike Has Taught Me About White Privilege

Now sometimes its dangerous for me because people in cars are just blatantly a**holes to me. If I am in the road—where I legally belong—people will yell at me to get on the sidewalk. If I am on the sidewalk—which is sometimes the safest place to be—people will yell at me to get on the road. People in cars think its funny to roll down their window and yell something right when they get beside me. Or to splash me on purpose. People I have never met are angry at me for just being on a bike in “their” road and they let me know with colorful language and other acts of aggression.

I can imagine that for people of color life in a white-majority context feels a bit like being on a bicycle in midst of traffic. They have the right to be on the road, and laws on the books to make it equitable, but that doesn’t change the fact that they are on a bike in a world made for cars. Experiencing this when I’m on my bike in traffic has helped me to understand what privilege talk is really about.

[daleanime]

48. Read it, liked it....

definitely works.

[LanternWaste]

45. I think you''re confusing "infer" and "imply."

I think you''re confusing 'infer' and 'imply,' as 'privilege' in no way implies a benefit or immunity that should be denied.

[FLPanhandle]

47. I'm in a minority here, but as a white male who grew up painfully poor

I don't believe in "white privilege". I believe there is "class privilege".

Before you send me a bunch of links, books, and videos.. I've seen most of them. Their arguments haven't convinced me when I look back at my life.

[mercuryblues]

58. I also

grew up painfully poor. But never once did I hear we were poor because we were lazy. Never once, even though we received welfare at times were we considered leaches because of our race. Never once was my color a barrier to where we could live, even with subsidized housing. Nope, no projects for us. Not once after my family earned enough money to start the upward mobility was it considered an anomaly and held up as an example for the rest of my race to emulate. Never once was my race used to define me. Nor did the actions of others in my racial group used to define me.

[FLPanhandle]

59. Hardly a privilege if it only provides some supposed and disputed intangible benefits.

But my supposed "White Privilege" never put food on the table, didn't add heating or cooling to the house, didn't provide me with a room in the house (forcing me to sleep on the porch), didn't provide any scholarships or extra money for college, didn't stop me from being looked at as a potential thief when entering a store.

I've moved well past those beginnings but it was through a lot of hard work without seeing any boost from my skin color.

If all this supposed white privilege couldn't even supply a single tangible benefit, then I'm not buying it.

Just my experience and opinion....

[mercuryblues]

62. Oh

I see it now. You are heavily invested in the idea that you did it all on your own and only you and your hardship matter.

Not me. You see I remember segregation.

[treestar]

85. But it did

It made it easier to get a job, get paid more, thus be able to put food on the table and heat and cool the house. It made it more likely there was a house/porch and not a tenement. It made it more likely there were scholarships to qualify for and that the qualify of your previous education would make it more likely you would. And if you're white no one looked at you as a potential their automatically, they have to have some other reason, clothing or whatever it is.

My college roommate who was black told me about her segregated school having older textbooks. It made her quality of education lower. So it took more for her to get into the same college than I did. (And I don't think there was any affirmative action in her case.)

[alp227]

82. I would say both race/class privilege concepts have nuggets of truth. nt

[gordianot]

56. Inequality in the pursuit of justice happens often enough to perpetuate "white privilege".

or at least the perception of white privilege. Also seldom discussed are pockets predominately rural but sometimes urban environments that non whites would want to avoid in all circumstances without socio economic factors being considered. Jim Crow never died he just took down the signs and is willing to be a little more tolerant in order to get Federal Grants. Then there is an entire major political party that works on the premise that only certain people should be allowed to vote and then have equal representation. Good old Anglo-Saxon values.

As Grandpa used to say sometimes windows looking in work much better than windows looking out.

[loyalsister]

71. Reminds me of a recent conversation

on minimum wage. A friend said she didn't like the $15 minimum wage because it devalues the $12\hr seniority, etc. OIW, wage superiority shall not be infringed.
If the desire for things to be more fair is offensive because it wipes out a sense of superiority, is it an injustice or is it possible that it was it a unjust structure to begin with?

[noiretextatique]

84. unjust structure to begin with

that benefits anyone with white skin, but not equally, just as not all white south africans benefited equally from apartheid. and THIS is what this conversation is truly about. Was it unjust to enslave Africans for hundreds of years? Was it unjust to institute Jim Crow for another 100 or so years? Do those past injustices have lingering, systemic injustices that continue to negatively impact African-Americans? If so... are we still dithering around over semantics. Thanks for making it clear, loyalsister.

[Anansi1171]

103. Mass incarceration and a war on blacks and latinoss...

...obstensibly over drugs that just so happen to come from central america and Afghanistan just when US intelligence agencies are intervening in those places - yeah - those evil slavery and jim crow institutions long ago, in a galaxy far far away.

[noiretextatique]

77. how you propose to keep white privilege

and give everyone else the privileges of white privilege? yeah...something has to be taken away.

[rbrnmw]

94. sigh

Last edited Tue Sep 2, 2014, 10:10 PM - Edit history (1)

How many times does white privilage need to be explained to white people who have never experienced racism first-hand?
just because white people say something doesn't. exist doesn't. mske it true.

[pipoman]

102. Endlessly....wasting precious time that could actually be spent

Raising awareness of inequality. ...but alas, some people have a vested interest in not solving the problem of inequality and pushes the notion of division through semantics to insure it is never addressed.

[Starry Messenger]

104. Why do you folks want to silence people who don't have a problem with it?