One easy thing every white person could do to make the world a better place

[Laurie4b]

Probably because "seniors" refers to a stage of life that anyone can attain simply by not dying. Most people associate different life stages with certain responsibilities, so the video of your example comes across as general advice that the entire world will find useful at some point.

 

It was just an analogy and yes, it was imperfect, as most are. I genuinely don't get the offense.

[Mrs Mungo]

I think this is possibly the most disappointing thread that I have ever read.

 

Laurie, I think it was a great topic and you really gave me something to think about. I think people should take more time to stand up for those who seem powerless or put upon in a given situation.

[Dandelion]

I think it's equal parts awful and hilarious that a conversation a black woman wanted to have with white Americans has turned, in this instance, into a discussion concerned with white suffering and white sensibilities. Such an exquisite and ironic example of white people protecting their privilege.

 

I've found this discussion helpful. It's caused me to look at this issue from a different perspective. And I'm glad there have been people participating in this discussion who have been willing to share their perspectives in a civil, non-confrontational way.

 

To be clear, we're discussing white privilege only because the woman in the video made it an integral part of her story.  She said it was her SIL's white privilege that allowed her to stand up for her.  We're not discussing white privilege because we're "concerned with white suffering and white sensibilities" as you put it.  When something is posted on this board for discussion, we should be able to discuss it.  

 

I can't speak for anyone else, but my issue with the term "white privilege" does not stem from discomfort, guilt, or a misunderstanding of the term.  Just wanted to address that, since that appears to be the prevalent assumption.

 

The term does not cause me discomfort or guilt, because I've done nothing wrong.  I have zero control over my skin color or how people treat me based upon my skin color. I've always treated people equally regardless of skin color or race. Nothing to feel uncomfortable or guilty about.

 

I'm also very familiar with the term and its origins.  In fact, I defined it earlier in this thread in one of my posts.  I'm sure someone would have corrected me if I got it wrong.  No misunderstanding.

 

My issues with the term:

 

- It attempts to frame the societal benefits and treatment that should be the norm for all people as a privilege that only white people - and presumably all white people - have.  This is incorrect, because (1) not all white people receive those societal benefits and treatment , and (2) many people of color do receive those benefits and treatment. To provide a relevant data point, of the 20 million people living in what is termed "extreme poverty" in the U.S. at the end of 2011 (making less than 50% of the poverty line), 42% were white and 27% were black.  While there may not be a direct correlation between income and white privilege, it seems that one would be hard pressed to show how white individuals living in extreme poverty are privileged or benefitting in any way because of their skin color. The challenges that come with extreme poverty tend to transcend race. And that's just one subset (representing 8.4 million white people) of the white population to which white privilege would most likely not apply.  

 

- It attempts to separate (and perhaps attribute increased importance to) white racism against people of color from any other kind of racism.  It's been stated repeatedly in this thread that the concept of white privilege does not equate to racism, and is somehow separate. The definition of racism does not support that assertion.  

 

- Racism is defined in part as "the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races." (source)

 

- White privilege is a concept that "refers to the set of societal privileges that white people are argued to benefit from beyond those commonly experienced by people of color in the same social, political, or economic spaces (nation, community, workplace, income, etc.)." (source)  

 

- When you look at the two definitions above, they're very similar.  You could paraphrase the concept of white privilege as "the belief that all members of the white race enjoy privileges specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as superior to another race or races."  That's the definition of racism from the first bullet above, with just a few words changed.  

 

- It is difficult to define and understand (perhaps because of the issues outlined above), and therefore provides a less effective foundation for discussions regarding racism.  To my earlier point, it does not lend itself to "mutual purpose" in the same way that everyone can rally around the concept of eradicating racism. 

 

Because of the above issues, the term is IMO unhelpful to any real effort to discuss and address racism in the U.S.

[Laurie4b]

If the title had said something along the lines of, "One hard thing white Americans can do to make America a better place" I might have felt differently about the title of the thread. But since white on black racism isn't the only (and maybe not even the biggest) race problem in the US it would have still chaffed.

 

I also have a deep seated and well earned cynical side. I hardly ever see the "innocent phrase" as innocent. Everyone has an agenda.

 

What would have been the difference if it said, "one hard thing..."

 

What about the video triggers your cynical side? What do you see as the agenda?  I'm perplexed. I thought it was a really gracious way of telling the story.

 

Like I've said upthread, I have a lovely African American friend, who, in the very cosmopolitan, ultra liberal community that we live in, experiences stuff like this all too frequently. She will confide her sadness in me and another colleague at work if there's been a particularly hurtful example.  She doesn't have a chip on her shoulder. She is an incredible example to me of Christian forgiveness and grace poured out over and over and over. If our places were exchanged, and I experienced what she does, I'd definitely have a chip on my shoulder. An Asian friend has told me essentially the same thing as the woman was saying on the video: that it makes it so much easier to have a white person sometimes be the one to speak up about a racial issue--for instance in a work setting.  Because he, like my AA girlfriend, doesn't always want to be the ones bringing it up. It's encouraging to them to have allies. That's what I heard in the video.

 

I have also been discriminated against by an African American professor I had. My roommate got a significantly higher grade than I did (she was AA)  and we did the final project together as a team, had equally good test grades, etc. It was pretty raw discrimination.  I've lived with a young black woman who was kind of rough and she didn't filter all the stuff her friends said about white people. Pretty eye opening. Our foster daughter, who was AA, would report similar things. I've had an Asian friend tell me unthinkingly that her husband was concerned because their son was hanging around white boys (I am the mother of 4 white boys and was kind of incredulous that she would just say that. :lol:  On the other hand, she was right. Mine would have a bad influence on hers in the areas of being lackadaisical about school work, etc. :tongue_smilie: ) So I have been on the receiving end of racial prejudice as a white person--though I'm not entirely sure how that's related, but others seem to connect those dots..

 

But again, I am genuinely interested in what about it brings up a very different reaction in you because I think that's important. If we want to genuinely dialog about race (and it's a hard topic) we need to understand what triggers others.  I don't want to be saying, "Well you think x and I think y and we'll never agree." I want to understand. Are there particular experiences you've had ?

[jeninok]

Privilege is not racism, it is a fact of modern culture, we all have some and not others.  If we don't buck up and call a spade a spade, we won't ever be able to get to the bottom of the reasons racism exists in the first place.  Do you also agree that we shouldn't talk about male privilege, because it is squicky and makes the man feel bad??

 

The reason the white woman was able to step in and defend her SIL, is because she plays by a different set of rules, she did not become the angry black woman, she used her privilege in a positive way.

 

 

ETA:

Actually, I think it is probably a fact of humanity, we are tribal in nature, and patriarchy and rule of the rich has been the name of the game all along. Only by acknowledging it and owning it, can we change it.

[SKL]

Am I the only person who finds it disturbing that lack of racism is defined (in a quote above and elsewhere) as the lack of ability to oppress?  Why can't it just mean that people don't choose to hurt each other on the basis of race?

 

And, I don't agree that there are no important structures dominated by black people.  Maybe not nationwide, but at more relevant group levels, sure there are.  Check out my primary industry - community development finance.  High level bankers, government employees, nonprofit executives, politicians, and more - whites in high places are in the minority.  Education, nursing, and many other social fields are dominated by blacks in many areas.  Politics is in certain areas.

 

I do not, however, see racism correlating with clear domination by one race or the other.  Where I see the most and nastiest racism is where there is no clear dominant group and the competing groups (all of them) all feel relatively powerless in the grand scheme of things.

 

I don't see where the video in the OP is about systemic racism.  The woman wielding the "bad check list" is probably one of the most powerless individuals the black lady ever deals with.  She probably makes appx. minimum wage and couldn't pass the GED without a lot of study.  So yeah, she did something ignorant that was probably motivated by racial prejudice, but she has no real power to "oppress" black people.  I don't see how the fact that black people don't control, say, Wall Street has anything to do with that clerk's behavior.  I guarantee her choice to screen only blacks wasn't and wouldn't have been approved by the execs (white or black) of her employer.  If this incident were reported publicly it is likely the clerk would be unceremoniously fired.

[SKL]

Re male privilege, I know all about that from my past career in a very male-dominated industry.  I would never attempt to effect change by demanding that all the men recognize the unearned privileges they have.  First of all, it sounds like "poor me."  Secondly, it's obvious that would put every male on the defensive - especially the ones most inclined to support women!  The minute anyone plays the sex or race card (and that's what it is when you bring up male or white privilege), it's all over.  You may win the battle, but you'll lose the war.

 

You can't get someone on your team by emphasizing "us vs. them" which is what terms like "white privilege" do.

[SKL]

You mean the minute someone accurately names racism or misogyny or classism, those who perpetuate or deny the practices get uncomfortable and act to retain and reinforce their privilege ? Why yes, they do.

 

No, what I mean is that the minute you pull that card ("male privilege"), you redefine your relationship with the individual/group you are dealing with to be primarily about sex/race battles instead of about a common goal.  If your relationship was originally based on, say, professional collaboration, you lose credibility as far as that is concerned.  So, one must ask oneself, does one want to be taken seriously as a professional, or as a stirrer of sh!t?  Can't really have it both ways (unless your profession is journalist or social studies professor).

[jeninok]

So, wait I think you might be saying that if someone is acting in a racist or misogynist way, we shouldn't call it that, but rather we should call it something else so as not to stir the pot.  

 

You have got to be kidding me. 

 

No one here is talking about being an angry man hating feminist, or some sort of crusading crazy white lady out to save all the poor colored folk,  rather if that is what it is, name it, claim it, and speak out about it.

 

 

Also, the issue isn't getting other people to see it, you aren't going to go around telling all the men about their privilege, the point is to own it within ourselves.

 

[Laura Corin]

LOL, I was stuck in a Chinese city where nobody spoke English, my luggage lost, trying to buy a few things (difficult since at size 8 I was the fattest woman in the city), and their computer didn't like my credit card.  I must have left my "white privilege" at home, because I sure wasn't feeling it that day.  I was actually afraid.

 

 

It's interesting that you mention China.  I felt my white privilege throughout my time there.  As one concrete example: a Chinese American friend would be routinely told how terrible her Chinese was, whilst her white American boyfriend and I had our equivalent language ability praised to the skies.  My Chinese American friend had learned Chinese as an adult, just as we had.

 

I also had black friends in China, and what I experienced was definitely white privilege, not foreigner privilege.

 

FWIW, I think that what you experienced in China, SKL, was what anyone - of whatever race - can feel when trying to negotiate an unfamiliar country with few language skills.

 

 

L

[Rosie_0801]

'Society' in this context generally means a country and its institutions, yes.

 

Maybe limiting thinking on this subject to nation wide trends is simplifying the conversation too much for it to be effective.

[ktgrok]

Unfortunately, you'll probably won't get any hard data because racism against non-minorities isn't studied well, if at all. Anytime it occurs it is all hushed up and swept under the rug.

 

Much of the data that shows the prevalance of institutionalized racism also disproves the idea that whites are being discriminated against on a broad basis. Looking at employment figures, incarceration rates, etc make it pretty obvious that the white man isn't being held down.

[ktgrok]

I agree. I've never heard the term white privilege before this discussion. Using in conjunction with racism just makes one hear, yet again, how terrible white people are for being born white.

 

I can't tell you how many times I had to go into a predominantly black neighborhood on a call to end up hearing "gray girl" or "cracker" or worse. Yet, I've never treated anyone while I was on the job without respect. (In my private life i can get bitchy. nobody's perfect) I've never uttered a racial slur. I've never told ethnic jokes. My people were, until my parents' generation, poor as dirt. We never had an indentured servant much less a slave. But I'm one of the bad guy for being born white. How is that not racism? And what privilege am I getting?

 

 

And once again, white privilege doesn't mean that you (or I) are terrible for being born white. It doesn't mean you have mistreated anyone. It doesn't mean you are the bad guy. NO ONE is saying that. To be privileged doesn't make you evil or bad or racist. It means you do, despite your best wishes, benefit from a society that favors white people. That's all. So you are less likely to be followed around in a store. You are less likely to be harrassed by the police. You are more likely to be taken seriously by various officials. You are less likely to be arrested, and if you are arrested will probably get a lesser sentence than someone that committed the same crime while being black. You will be treated more fairly at mortgage offices. Etc etc etc. This has been proven. But that isn't your fault, or anything you did. No one is saying it is. They just want people to admit it happens. 

 

In an analogy, lets say you win the lottery. You become fabulously wealthy, every one knows you are wealthy. You will receive certain privileges because of it....people will treat you differently when you are a multi millionaire. They will treat you better than they treat a homeless person. That doesn't mean that you caused the homeless person to be poor. It doesn't mean YOU treat homeless people badly. The homeless situation is NOT your fault. Being rich doesn't make you the bad guy. But it would be silly to say you don't have a certain privleged place in your community by virtue of being wealthy. 

 

Does that make more sense?  It really isn't an accusation, or something to be guilty of, it just IS. And if you don't acknowledge that you are treated differently by virtue of being white than it shows that you are not seeing how people of color are being treated differently. To deny white privilege means saying everyone is being treated equally, that people of color are not being discriminated against or facing a harder road, and that is why they (and I) get upset when people say white privilege doesn't exist. 

[ktgrok]

Sorry, but I believe your second sentence contradicts your first.   Being willing to speak against discrimination, etc., is doing something. 

 

I'm not disagreeing with those things, but it doesn't make sense to say no one needs to do anything, and then list the things that you think they need to do.

 

I'm not contradicting myself exactly. 

 

I said no one needs to make up for having white privilege. I stand by that. It isn't something one is guilty of, or has to make up for. We don't have to do pennance for it, it isn't a bad thing to have. 

 

That said, yes, there are ways we can use it to further the good of society, but that doesn't mean we have to "make up for it". 

 

My analogy is that someone is gifted a huge sum of money. They become fabulously wealthy. Although it would be best if they used that money to help society in some way, and I'm sure the poverty stricken would like them to use it to fight poverty in some way, they are not "guilty" of being rich, and don't have to "make up for it" in some way. They didn't do anything wrong to get that money, it isn't a sin they need to do pennance for. 

 

So I guess my thoughts cam out convoluted, but what I really meant was that yes, the woman in the video was asking us to use our white privlege to advance equality. Use the tool we have to the best of our ability. But I wanted to stress it wasn't something to feel bad about, or to feel guilty about having. I don't think I've done that well though. 

[ktgrok]

I think she means to do those things less out of guilt and more out of responsibility, if that makes it clearer ?

 

I know I have zero personal guilt over the white invasion of my country. So any time I use my white privilege to - idk - fundraise for indigeneous literacy projects - that's not out of guilt but because I feel a responsibility to act in a way that doesn't perpetuate historic wrongs and that provides some miniscule restitution.

 

That's exactly what I meant. Can I buy you a drink, lol? You are saying what I want to say much better than I can. I think my ability to communicate is being sapped by a teething baby that never sleeps.

[ktgrok]

Sadie, no one is ignoring anything. At least not on this thread. You seem to be focusing on a part of the whole thing called racism.

 

The title of this thread is offensive. It isn't just white people who are haters. And the white people that are are a percentage. Some white people need to do some different thinking. Some black people need to also. As do the Hispanics, the Indians, the native people's. everyone.

 

 

 

The point of the video, and what people are saying about white privilege, is that yes, all people need to work against racism. But some people, because of what is called white privilege, have more power to accomplish things. 

 

We should all fight against poverty. But those with more resources/contacts/etc will be more effective on a grand scale. We all can give change to the homeless guy on the street corner, and we all should. But when it comes to shaping policy those who are in political power have more ability to make lasting change. Not a particularly great analogy ( teethign baby, no sleep , very little coffee), but hopefully the idea comes across. No one is saying that we should all, white/black/brown/red/purple fight against racism. Just that those who have more power in society should use that power to accomplish things, rather than pretend they don't have that power. Does that make sense?

[ktgrok]

What is it you want? Do you want white people to say that they are evil just by existing? Is it all white people you have this issue with or just some?

 

Admitting the playing field isn't level, that white people, in our culture, have an easier path, on average, doesn't make white people evil. I'm not sure what you say that it does.

[ktgrok]

As I said before prejudice is learned. Everyone must work to not teach prejudice and hate to our children. Only then can this racism madness end. Everyone- not just white people. (here is where I find offense in the title of the thread.)

 

 

But the title doesn't say, or imply, that ONLY white people can make the world a better place. It just says this is something white people can do. It doesn't say the entire burden of improving society in all ways is something white people can do. 

[Carrie12345]

I've never said I don't believe in white privilege. I don't resent anything.

 

I was simply commenting on a previous post in which the poster said there was nothing for white people to do to make up for white privilege, but then immediately contradicted herself by listing things white people should do. I even said I didn't necessarily disagree with those things!

You're equating working toward equal standing with "making up for" something. It's not flowers after an argument, it's just doing the right thing.

[marbel]

The point of the video, and what people are saying about white privilege, is that yes, all people need to work against racism. But some people, because of what is called white privilege, have more power to accomplish things. 

 

We should all fight against poverty. But those with more resources/contacts/etc will be more effective on a grand scale. We all can give change to the homeless guy on the street corner, and we all should. But when it comes to shaping policy those who are in political power have more ability to make lasting change. Not a particularly great analogy ( teethign baby, no sleep , very little coffee), but hopefully the idea comes across. No one is saying that we should all, white/black/brown/red/purple fight against racism. Just that those who have more power in society should use that power to accomplish things, rather than pretend they don't have that power. Does that make sense?

 

I don't think people are pretending they don't have that power.  Without going back through this long thread, the overall impression I have is that those who have disagreed with the notion of white privilege are people who have specifically not had power, and/or have been treated poorly because they are white. 

 

You (general you who are berating people for disagreeing) can toss out all the data you want telling people that they have white privilege, but if they have not experienced it, but rather have experienced the opposite, all that data is not helpful. 

 

That's not pretending. That's honestly not seeing it because they do not live it.

 

Now I have never seen any sort of incident remotely like what happened in the video.  I think I already said that I don't know if I have always lived in area where that does not happen, or if I am oblivious.  I'd vote for oblivious most of the time because when I am out and about I'm just trying to do what I need to do and not paying close attention to what's going on around me, except as regards safety.   I don't deny the existence of white privilege though I can't point to any experience I have had that illustrated it. But I also have not experienced the opposite, as other posted here have.

 

People don't like being told their experiences don't matter because statistics show their experiences don't happen very often.  It still happened.  It's not pretending.  It's not denial.  It's their real life. 

[Laurie4b]

Re male privilege, I know all about that from my past career in a very male-dominated industry.  I would never attempt to effect change by demanding that all the men recognize the unearned privileges they have.  First of all, it sounds like "poor me."  Secondly, it's obvious that would put every male on the defensive - especially the ones most inclined to support women!  The minute anyone plays the sex or race card (and that's what it is when you bring up male or white privilege), it's all over.  You may win the battle, but you'll lose the war.

 

You can't get someone on your team by emphasizing "us vs. them" which is what terms like "white privilege" do.

 

You're absolutely right. In this scenario, a woman either becomes like one of the guys, and sucks it up where that distorts her and harms her, or she'll be accused of playing the "feminist" card and be unheard.

 

But what would happen if there was a man or a couple in that same workplace who understood that it was a guys' world and that everyone was playing by guy rules, even if some more typically female approaches to life might have some value?  What difference would it make if that man or couple of them helped the others to see by explaining things, pointing out their own privilege as men in that workplace and helping other guys to get it? What if they themselves made an effort to bridge the gap between practices ways of communicating that felt natural and comfortable to men and those that felt natural and comfortable to women? What if the some men called out outright discrimination happening?

 

I have been in workplaces where this happened and where it didn't. I've always been thankful for men who "got it" who were willing to be allies and not just go about their business  expecting women to conform to doing things 100% their way because it worked for the guys.

[Laurie4b]

Sorry, but I believe your second sentence contradicts your first.   Being willing to speak against discrimination, etc., is doing something. 

 

I'm not disagreeing with those things, but it doesn't make sense to say no one needs to do anything, and then list the things that you think they need to do.

 

She said no one needs to "make up for" white privilege, not that no one should do anything about racial injustice. It's not a sin that one does penance for, not a wrong for which one does restitution, which is what I think "make up for" means.

 

She then goes on to say what she thinks is right to do. I don't think there is a contradiction.

[ktgrok]

Re male privilege, I know all about that from my past career in a very male-dominated industry.  I would never attempt to effect change by demanding that all the men recognize the unearned privileges they have.  First of all, it sounds like "poor me."  Secondly, it's obvious that would put every male on the defensive - especially the ones most inclined to support women!  The minute anyone plays the sex or race card (and that's what it is when you bring up male or white privilege), it's all over.  You may win the battle, but you'll lose the war.

 

You can't get someone on your team by emphasizing "us vs. them" which is what terms like "white privilege" do.

 huh? So if I say "I'm discriminated against" I'm making it worse? So as a woman, if I want equal rights to men I need to NOT mention that I don't have them, and just somehow hint at it or something???

 

And wouldn't it GREATLY help effect change, in your example, if the men DID recognize their unearned privileges? How can they see that women don't have them if they don't see that they DO have them?

[ktgrok]

No, what I mean is that the minute you pull that card, you redefine your relationship with the individual/group you are dealing with to be primarily about sex/race battles instead of about a common goal.  If your relationship was originally based on, say, professional collaboration, you lose credibility as far as that is concerned.  So, one must ask oneself, does one want to be taken seriously as a professional, or as a stirrer of sh!t?  Can't really have it both ways (unless your profession is journalist or social studies professor).

 

So wanting equal rights makes one unprofessional? Wow.

[Carrie12345]

You're absolutely right. In this scenario, a woman either becomes like one of the guys, and sucks it up where that distorts her and harms her, or she'll be accused of playing the "feminist" card and be unheard.

 

But what would happen if there was a man or a couple in that same workplace who understood that it was a guys' world and that everyone was playing by guy rules, even if some more typically female approaches to life might have some value? What difference would it make if that man or couple of them helped the others to see by explaining things, pointing out their own privilege as men in that workplace and helping other guys to get it? What if they themselves made an effort to bridge the gap between practices ways of communicating that felt natural and comfortable to men and those that felt natural and comfortable to women? What if the some men called out outright discrimination happening?

 

I have been in workplaces where this happened and where it didn't. I've always been thankful for men who "got it" who were willing to be allies and not just go about their business expecting women to conform to doing things 100% their way because it worked for the guys.

Exactly. It does take a perspective shift that isn't easy, but it's worth it.

 

My own dh, who isn't evil, works in a very male dominated field. He had a new woman on a job who really struggled to keep up, and he vented to me about how awful it was and how the woman he's worked with more frequently busted her hide twice as hard as any man just to be respected, so this new woman should be ashamed.

 

It opened a HUGE, long-standing conversation between the two of us. He SHOULDN'T expect a woman to work twice as hard just to earn respect. Maybe this new woman wasn't good enough for good enough, but she should be held to the same standards as any crew member, not the superhuwoman. He's not "making up" for anything, he's making a fair workplace.

 

It had nothing to do with intentional descrimination, just a product of being numb to his privilege after years in that environment. NOW his eyes are open to this, and it does benefit his entire company, business-wise and person to person.

[Laurie4b]

I don't think people are pretending they don't have that power.  Without going back through this long thread, the overall impression I have is that those who have disagreed with the notion of white privilege are people who have specifically not had power, and/or have been treated poorly because they are white. 

 

You (general you who are berating people for disagreeing) can toss out all the data you want telling people that they have white privilege, but if they have not experienced it, but rather have experienced the opposite, all that data is not helpful. 

 

That's not pretending. That's honestly not seeing it because they do not live it.

 

Now I have never seen any sort of incident remotely like what happened in the video.  I think I already said that I don't know if I have always lived in area where that does not happen, or if I am oblivious.  I'd vote for oblivious most of the time because when I am out and about I'm just trying to do what I need to do and not paying close attention to what's going on around me, except as regards safety.   I don't deny the existence of white privilege though I can't point to any experience I have had that illustrated it. But I also have not experienced the opposite, as other posted here have.

 

People don't like being told their experiences don't matter because statistics show their experiences don't happen very often.  It still happened.  It's not pretending.  It's not denial.  It's their real life. 

 

Thank you so much for this. I think it's helping me see where some misunderstandings are.

 

White privilege does not mean that white people aren't discriminated against and it doesn't mean that  that white people don't experience hatred from black folks, Asians, Latinos, etc. Anyone of any race can be a hater. Any ethnicity has a lot of embarrassing people. I do think that it sounds like that is the crux of the issue for a number of people in the thread because of connotations that arise for them in the phrase "white privilege."  And yes, in terms of hatred,  absolutely everyone is responsible for that and should be calling out their own family members, friends, etc. on racial hatred and bigotry when they see it or hear it.

 

White privilege doesn't mean that white people go sailing through life, that they don't experience poverty, etc.

 

White privilege is not an accusation. It's a description of something very basic and natural: our society was established by white people and whites have been the majority for centuries. So society tends to "fit" whites cultural practices in a way that it doesn't "fit" others' cultural practices. So white concepts of time, appropriate degree of volume in interpersonal interactions in public, ways of parenting, what constitutes "flesh" tone in band-aids, etc. are what set the norms in the society. Others have to adapt to those. It's like a fish who doesn't notice the water compared to the otter who knows very well when he is in it or out of it because he has to adjust. Our society is also still male-privileged though that has undergone much more change.

 

Additionally, white privilege is a kind of privilege that relates to people's treatment of a person. This difference in treatment can be entirely unconscious. Research has shown over and over and over that certain external characteristics get associated in people's minds with certain assumptions about their character and abilities. I've read studies attributing certain positive attributes of the mind and heart to men who are taller, people who are more attractive, people who are thinner, women who wear make-up over those who don't, etc.  I think it's a basic weakness of human beings that we make prejudgments based on appearance. (And again, many of those are unconscious and we wouldn't even agree with those prejudgments if brought to conscious thought. ) This also is a part of white privilege.

 

Perhaps it would be better if the phrase indicated that it was about the privilege of the dominant element in society because that's what it means.  But no one has coined a term as an alternate that is commonly accepted.

 

It certainly appears that it has bad connotations that complicate dialog, having people arguing who probably actually agree with each other on most aspects of the conversations except for the connotations.

 

[Laurie4b]

What do we agree on?

 

Do we all agree that hatred and bigotry toward anyone based on outward appearance is wrong?

 

Do we all agree that it is a moral good to work toward racial understanding and reconciliation whatever your ethnicity?

 

Do we all agree that people of every race experience bigotry and hatred from others of other races and no race is worse than any other in terms of the tendency to have people within it who are overt bigots?

 

Do people agree that people have a tendency to judge people  by aspects of their appearance even if they are not consciously intending to?

 

Does anyone here believe that white people are exclusively at fault for what is wrong in the world?

 

Does anyone here believe that racial reconciliation is the job only of white people?

 

Has anyone gained an understanding of what sets people good people off in discussions about race?

 

Has anyone here who is white been stimulated to think more about hidden advantages we might have?

 

Has anyone here found out about experiences that people of color have regularly that were news to you?

 

 

 

 

[Murmer]

It has been less than 200 years since slavery was abolished (1865), and even still there was outright hate and disgust towards black people by many white people for another 100 years.  It has only been another almost 50 years in which we have established laws to ensure that people are not discriminated against based exclusively on skin color.  Basically less than 1 generation has passed in which legal racism was allowed and encouraged in some areas of the nation.  Thankfully the evolution in the last 50 years has made it very clear that Hate speech towards other is NOT Ok and people are not accepting outright racist speech.  

 

But 50 years is not a lot of time to really deal with the structure of racism that was an integral part of the US for 100's of years.  There is trying and there has been some positive changes but change is slow.  This video is telling us that we all can have the power to help change the structure by using our power that we have by being the majority (white privilege) to speak up when we see examples that while typically is not intentionally racist shows that we still have some learning to do regarding stereotypes, bias, and prejudice that was entrenched for 100's of years.  

 

White privilege is part of the conversation because whites hundreds of years ago and 50 years ago made the rules that created the system that was based on racism.  Yes most of us had NOTHING to do with it but we now have the ability to help make it better for everyone because all of us agree that all people regardless of skin color should be treated with respect and individually I am sure we all do our best to live that way.  But that is not enough because there is underlying framework that still functions on race from before our time and we need to take the time to help dismantle it because we are the majority (for now).

 

Yes there are hateful biased people of all races and it is upsetting when we are treated in a manner that is not fitting our personal beliefs that all people should be treated with respect.  It is wrong when anyone uses their bias and prejudice to treat people differently based on skin color!  But that is not an established pattern of oppression as has been demonstrated by dominate culture and sadly is still demonstrated more often than most of us would really like. 

 

And no not a black in white thing 1940 internment of Japanese Americans, rules limiting chinese immigration that in some places was not eliminated from law until the 1900's.  But black and white has had the longest standing obvious display of systematic hate, discrimation, and bias.

 

This video and conversation is and should be about what we can each do to continue to create a world in which want our children to be raised in were tolerance and respect are shown in every way possible to all people.

[Hunter's Moon]

It's interesting how differently people respond to the term "white privilege". I honestly don't remember hearing the term until several weeks ago, when I first encountered it while doing some reading during the George Zimmerman trial. As I read one writer's definition of the term, as a white woman, my initial thought was, "YES!! That is right on!" I never felt that I was being accused of anything, or that I was supposed to feel guilty about having white privilege. It was just a very good term to summarize all of those hidden benefits that I experience simply because of the color of my skin. It's probably better to say "the negative things I avoid", though.

 

As a privileged white woman, I could easily fail to see the discrimination around me. However, I once dated a black guy, which was an incredibly eye-opening experience. And I have a son who has tattoos, piercings and sometimes weird hair styles. Now, I recognize that those are all choices he made, but the fact is that people wrongly make assumptions about him based on outward appearance.

And you are absolutely right. The term "white privilege" does not carry with it any accusations. However, I hear it used accusingly quite a bit in my area. Just this week, I was in the car with my DH, SIL, BIL, and MIL. MIL's friend was driving us to the airport. Everyone but me was black. There was an inconsiderate guy taking a picture with his family right in the middle of the parking lane. MIL's friend said "Inconsiderate, pretty white boy". I have met plenty of inconsiderate whites, as well as blacks, Asians, Hispanics, etc. Had I spoken up and said something, I would have been seen as uptight.

 

I have experienced this before in school as well. Told by a principal that the person harassing me about my race was not a racist, because he was Hispanic. Huh??!

 

Minimizing my experiences because of white privilege will get me to shut down. Simple as that. (Not meant in a hostile way, and not directed at anyone in particular).

[SKL]

You mean the minute someone accurately names racism or misogyny or classism, those who perpetuate or deny the practices get uncomfortable and act to retain and reinforce their privilege ? Why yes, they do.

 

Before you were (or someone was) talking about forcing people to accept they have "white privilege" and arguing that of course we'd force men to accept "male privilege" so why not "white privilege" too.  That was what I was responding to.  Forcing the point of "white privilege" or "male privilege" onto someone who hasn't actually done anything wrong.  You twisted my words and changed the course of the conversation.  Intelligent people cannot have a discussion with someone so intent on proving *their* point that they will distort what others are saying to do so.

[Parrothead]

What would have been the difference if it said, "one hard thing..."

 

What about the video triggers your cynical side? What do you see as the agenda? I'm perplexed. I thought it was a really gracious way of telling the story.

 

 

It wasn't the video itself i took issue with, but the title. The title is misleading. Is it used to describe a problem in the US or a world-wide problem? The title implies the whites are not doing enough to make the world a better place. Yet, on a world-wide scale, white is a minority.

 

If the producers of the video wanted to make the world a better place, as the title states, they would show the world-wide issue of racism.

 

Even if all the white people stood up against racism in the US, the world wouldn't be much better than it is now. Just one portion of it.

 

Again, let me state how I categorically am disgusted by racism in all forms. Also bigotry and discrimination. My whole point throughout this thread is that racism isn't limited to something only white people do. It is a world-wide problem. Until we become the all encompassing human race racism will continue.

[Laurie4b]

It wasn't the video itself i took issue with, but the title. The title is misleading. Is it used to describe a problem in the US or a world-wide problem? The title implies the whites are not doing enough to make the world a better place. Yet, on a world-wide scale, white is a minority.

 

If the producers of the video wanted to make the world a better place, as the title states, they would show the world-wide issue of racism.

 

Even if all the white people stood up against racism in the US, the world wouldn't be much better than it is now. Just one portion of it.

 

Again, let me state how I categorically am disgusted by racism in all forms. Also bigotry and discrimination. My whole point throughout this thread is that racism isn't limited to something only white people do. It is a world-wide problem. Until we become the all encompassing human race racism will continue.

 

Got it. I didn't take "world" literally, but figuratively (like in "random acts of kindness make the world a better place" but it only means "the environment around you" ), so I only understood her to be talking about the US.  That helps a lot.

 

 

[SKL]

You're absolutely right. In this scenario, a woman either becomes like one of the guys, and sucks it up where that distorts her and harms her, or she'll be accused of playing the "feminist" card and be unheard.

 

But what would happen if there was a man or a couple in that same workplace who understood that it was a guys' world and that everyone was playing by guy rules, even if some more typically female approaches to life might have some value?  What difference would it make if that man or couple of them helped the others to see by explaining things, pointing out their own privilege as men in that workplace and helping other guys to get it? What if they themselves made an effort to bridge the gap between practices ways of communicating that felt natural and comfortable to men and those that felt natural and comfortable to women? What if the some men called out outright discrimination happening?

 

I have been in workplaces where this happened and where it didn't. I've always been thankful for men who "got it" who were willing to be allies and not just go about their business  expecting women to conform to doing things 100% their way because it worked for the guys.

 

Sure, but there's a logical progression.  First you prove yourself competent and reliable and loyal.  You find a team you can work with and be a great team player.  You do your professional part to help that team gain the clout needed in order to be listened to on things other than revenue, expenses, client service.  You pick the right time to make the right comment.  You feel out the situation and how far it's safe to go before you lose your place on that team.  (And this would be the case regardless of whether your concern was sex or race equailty, tolerance of homosexuals, acceptance of jeans Fridays or business casual meeting attire, offering vegan lunch options, lobbying for a later or earlier start time, bringing spouses to the company retreat, or a thousand other things.)

 

An example from my experience was that when we entertained clients at ball games, more and more often the key people were female.  And where the men mostly talked about basketball players and how the cheerleaders looked, the women wanted to talk about their children, literature, schools.  I brought it up that they really needed women to come to small-group client/target meetings more often because they could probably make better connections and build trust with female targets.  This was well-received, BUT that was because I had already proven myself to be a valuable team player.  AND the focus was on what would be good for the company, not what would be good for me or for women.  Many workplace improvements are done this way.  "Wouldn't it be better for the company if I could work at home instead of having to spend time commuting and leave early to pick up my kids?"  "Why not include a pumping room in the new floor plan since that would make me feel better about coming back to work while I'm still nursing?"

[Laurie4b]

And you are absolutely right. The term "white privilege" does not carry with it any accusations. However, I hear it used accusingly quite a bit in my area. Just this week, I was in the car with my DH, SIL, BIL, and MIL. MIL's friend was driving us to the airport. Everyone but me was black. There was an inconsiderate guy taking a picture with his family right in the middle of the parking lane. MIL's friend said "Inconsiderate, pretty white boy". I have met plenty of inconsiderate whites, as well as blacks, Asians, Hispanics, etc. Had I spoken up and said something, I would have been seen as uptight.

 

I have experienced this before in school as well. Told by a principal that the person harassing me about my race was not a racist, because he was Hispanic. Huh??!

 

Minimizing my experiences because of white privilege will get me to shut down. Simple as that. (Not meant in a hostile way, and not directed at anyone in particular).

 

That's a helpful insight to me. I think all people feel that way and it's something to keep in mind in these discussion. Am I minimizing anyone else's experience?

[Word Nerd]

White privilege is part of the conversation because whites hundreds of years ago and 50 years ago made the rules that created the system that was based on racism. Yes most of us had NOTHING to do with it but we now have the ability to help make it better for everyone because all of us agree that all people regardless of skin color should be treated with respect and individually I am sure we all do our best to live that way. But that is not enough because there is underlying framework that still functions on race from before our time and we need to take the time to help dismantle it because we are the majority (for now).

 

What does dismantling that framework look like in practice?

[ktgrok]

Before you were (or someone was) talking about forcing people to accept they have "white privilege" and arguing that of course we'd force men to accept "male privilege" so why not "white privilege" too.  That was what I was responding to.  Forcing the point of "white privilege" or "male privilege" onto someone who hasn't actually done anything wrong.  You twisted my words and changed the course of the conversation.  Intelligent people cannot have a discussion with someone so intent on proving *their* point that they will distort what others are saying to do so.

 

Again...white privilege doesn't mean someone did something wrong. It just doesn't. It doesn't mean the person was racist, or took advantage in anyway. It just means they have certain advantages in our society. That is all it means. Even if one thinks they haven't experienced it, the fact is they are less likely to be considered scary, they are less likely to be stopped by the police, and if they are someday arrested they will, statistically, get a shorter sentence than if they were of color. That is what is meant.There is NO guilt associated with it. No "wrongness" implied.

[KarenNC]

It's interesting that you mention China.  I felt my white privilege throughout my time there.  As one concrete example: a Chinese American friend would be routinely told how terrible her Chinese was, whilst her white American boyfriend and I had our equivalent language ability praised to the skies.  My Chinese American friend had learned Chinese as an adult, just as we had.

 

I also had black friends in China, and what I experienced was definitely white privilege, not foreigner privilege.

 

FWIW, I think that what you experienced in China, SKL, was what anyone - of whatever race - can feel when trying to negotiate an unfamiliar country with few language skills.

 

 

L

 

Now, I would not have thought of this particular sort of thing as "white privilege" but rather as "pity for the foreigner,"  if that makes sense. Privilege has more to do with the unconscious assumptions we make rather than dealing with the facts in each specific case. They may have been unconsciously giving her the benefit of "Han privilege" and therefore had a stronger reaction when she didn't measure up. I would have assumed the people talking to you had higher fluency expectations of your Chinese American friend because she didn't look like a foreigner and should have been expected to know Chinese but didn't bother properly, where you would not.

 

We encountered this in Quebec---people were very intolerant of our poor French (bordering on rude and sometimes hostile) until they learned we were American and not Canadian (especially not citizens of Quebec, who should be expected to be fluent). Once we established that we were American, they were much more willing to put up with our poor attempts at French and to even admit that they spoke any English. I saw that more as pity for someone who was expected to be "slow" than as any sort of "American privilege," btw . :001_smile:

 

IIRC, you were in Hong Kong, yes? If so, that might also factor into the treatment of black vs white you mention (as I assume you mean in something other than language?).

[SKL]

Well, anyone who has lived in the world knows that people get defensive when they are told they have an unfair advantage.  Maybe it's time some people here acknowledged *that* fact.

 

I never said I don't have it better than some people because of my skin color.  That's because others are subjected to discrimination by stupid people.  The fact that I am not subjected to the same discrimination as a black person is rather obvious, but why is it about *me* in the first place, especially when  you go on to say I don't owe anyone anything by virtue of my DNA?

 

Maybe a better way of looking at it is that the way white people treat white people should be a "benchmark" of decency.  It is not a privilege, it is what we ALL owe to each other as human beings.

[SKL]

It's interesting that you mention China.  I felt my white privilege throughout my time there.  As one concrete example: a Chinese American friend would be routinely told how terrible her Chinese was, whilst her white American boyfriend and I had our equivalent language ability praised to the skies.  My Chinese American friend had learned Chinese as an adult, just as we had.

 

I also had black friends in China, and what I experienced was definitely white privilege, not foreigner privilege.

 

FWIW, I think that what you experienced in China, SKL, was what anyone - of whatever race - can feel when trying to negotiate an unfamiliar country with few language skills.

 

 

L

 

To clarify, my plane had been diverted due to fog to a city that tourists normally don't visit.  Of course in a tourist-friendly city (several of which we also visited) there is a whole different atmosphere.  But again, when I got briefly lost in an airport, I got hard, suspicious stares.

 

My real point was that it isn't helpful to make broad assumptions as if every place in the USA is the same.  Obviously Tai Yuan, China is an extreme (but a fun aside), but even in the USA there are places where people like blacks better than whites, will chat up blacks but just give minimal service to whites, for that matter will beat and rob non-blacks just for daring to walk there.  And then there are cases like the OP pointed out.  And everything in-between.

 

[Dandelion]

What do we agree on?

 

Do we all agree that hatred and bigotry toward anyone based on outward appearance is wrong?

 

Do we all agree that it is a moral good to work toward racial understanding and reconciliation whatever your ethnicity?

 

Do we all agree that people of every race experience bigotry and hatred from others of other races and no race is worse than any other in terms of the tendency to have people within it who are overt bigots?

 

Do people agree that people have a tendency to judge people  by aspects of their appearance even if they are not consciously intending to?

 

Does anyone here believe that white people are exclusively at fault for what is wrong in the world?

 

Does anyone here believe that racial reconciliation is the job only of white people?

 

Has anyone gained an understanding of what sets people good people off in discussions about race?

 

Has anyone here who is white been stimulated to think more about hidden advantages we might have?

 

Has anyone here found out about experiences that people of color have regularly that were news to you?

 

Yes, I agree with you on all of the above.  Thank you.  :)

 

Again...white privilege doesn't mean someone did something wrong. It just doesn't. It doesn't mean the person was racist, or took advantage in anyway. It just means they have certain advantages in our society. That is all it means. Even if one thinks they haven't experienced it, the fact is they are less likely to be considered scary, they are less likely to be stopped by the police, and if they are someday arrested they will, statistically, get a shorter sentence than if they were of color. That is what is meant.There is NO guilt associated with it. No "wrongness" implied.

 

Here's something that doesn't make sense to me about the concept of white privilege. I'm quoting ktgrok, but could have quoted any number of people who are saying the same thing.

 

"White privilege doesn't mean someone did something wrong."  That may be true for individual encounters between a white person and a person of color, but what keeps white privilege going?  It can't exist in a vacuum.  Something is happening to keep white privilege alive - otherwise it would be going away.  Who or what is responsible?

 

"No "wrongness" implied." To continue the above inquiry, I think most people would answer "who is responsible for keeping white privilege going?" with "white people".  It's the dominant white population segment in certain parts of the world that presumably continues to extend those privileges to itself.  After all, it wouldn't make sense to say that non-white people are actively sustaining white privilege.  The "implied wrongness" is that white people are sustaining white privilege and/or not doing enough to eradicate it.

[SKL]

Actually I do not agree that it is only white people who perpetuate what is here called "white privilege."  People of color often kiss up to white people compared to other people of color.

[Dandelion]

Actually I do not agree that it is only white people who perpetuate what is here called "white privilege."  People of color often kiss up to white people compared to other people of color.

 

That may be true.  But if you asked people of color who is responsible for perpetuating white privilege, would they see themselves as partially responsible?  Probably not.  They would probably place the majority of the blame for the existence, and perpetuation, of white privilege on white people.  

 

So, just as white people presumably have a difficult time recognizing white privilege, people of color might have a difficult time recognizing how they contribute to it in some cases. 

[KarenNC]

Maybe a better way of looking at it is that the way white people treat white people should be a "benchmark" of decency.  It is not a privilege, it is what we ALL owe to each other as human beings.

 

Yes, this. The privilege is that as members of what has been defined as the normative group in our particular culture we don't have to do anything special to be accorded this decency, while others do, and we are given a lot more latitude for differences. Anything that takes us out of the normative group in some way (different style of dress, speech, behavior, religion, economic status, etc) does affect that level of privilege to various degrees, however. Similarly, by doing something special--adopting the mannerisms, dress, speech, behavior, religion, etc of the normative group, usually to a higher standard than is expected of the normative group--- those who are outside in some way can be extended some of the benefits of that privilege to various degrees.

[SKL]

Actually the more I think about it, the problem here is that the people here trying to define "white privilege" are ignoring the actual meaning of "privilege."  Privilege is by definition not available to everyone.  But what we're talking about here is treatment that should be given to everyone.  It makes no sense.  The term "privilege" not only has a specific definition that is being ignored here, but it also has negative connotations.  When someone is referred to as a "privileged youth" the implication is that said youth hasn't had normal life experiences and is unlikely to be considerate of those who have.

 

It makes no sense to say someone has a "privilege" when you really mean that *other* people aren't being treated right.  Why not just say some groups of people aren't being treated right?  The only logical reason to screw with words in this way is to put white people on the defensive.  That has to be the intention.  Now some here are just going along because they assume whoever coined "white privilege" had purely neutral intentions.  I can understand that, but I think it's wrong.

[nmoira]

That may be true.  But if you asked people of color who is responsible for perpetuating white privilege, would they see themselves as partially responsible?  Probably not.  They would probably place the majority of the blame for the existence, and perpetuation, of white privilege on white people.  

 

So, just as white people presumably have a difficult time recognizing white privilege, people of color might have a difficult time recognizing how they contribute to it in some cases. 

 

This. It's systemic, and reinforced, wittingly or unwittingly, from those within the system. Change is affected by agitation from within, though some transitions get a jolt or a jumpstart, as with Title IX.

 

We're talking about two aspects of agitation, the first of which is the most easily understood: pointing out bad, biased or unjust behavior when we see it. It's not at all difficult to use generic language without reference to race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. in this case though the concept of relative privilege was introduced in the narrative. However, when talking about the more subtle aspects it's more difficult to not mention these things. It might help to remember that  ________ privilege as a factor rather than an absolute determinant. For example, all other things being equal, the taller candidate is likelier to get hired, or a candidate that is not obese, or the prettier (to a point), and it is not necessarily the case that the person doing the hiring is tall or not obese or pretty, or even makes the decision consciously. How do we become aware of and start to discuss this without using labels? How can we say that on average black men convicted of a crime receive longer sentences than white men (about 20% longer) without using racial terms? Awareness and acknowledgement is the first step to agitation and change.

[Word Nerd]

Maybe a better way of looking at it is that the way white people treat white people should be a "benchmark" of decency. It is not a privilege, it is what we ALL owe to each other as human beings.

I agree.

[marbel]

What do we agree on?

 

<snipped>

 

Well, I can speak only for myself, not for the collective "we" here, but I agree.  I did learn quite a bit, and thought it is/was a good discussion. 

[ktgrok]

It sounds like you want to reshape the world to a culture that you believe is 'right', without considering that others don't believe in your particular view of 'rightness', whether that's the person who is being changed or 'those in power' doing the change.

Well, Yes, I am trying to reshape the world to a culture in which everyone starts off with equal standing and equal rights. I suppose those who are against that, and are in favor of racism, would not believe in that view of "rightness". 

 

Specifically it sounds like you want a return to a 'hand out' rather than the current policy of a 'hand up'.

I haven't mentioned any social programs, so I don't know where you are getting that. Yes, I mentioned giving money to a homeless hungry person. That's about me personally seeing a hungry  or hurt or needy person and doing what I can to help them. I suppose I should not have implied that everyone would do that, it was just part of my analogy. My religious convictions require me to help someone in need when I see them. But again, that was part of an analogy, not my main point. 

 

 

For ex: Your call to give change to the homeless guy on the corner.. there are no homeless guys on the corner here. Begging is not an occupation that the community desires to promote...the community wants those who are capable to support themselves, not be on the dole or begging.

I don't think any community wants to promote begging as an occupation. Starving isn't a great occupation either though. 

The produce of planting the extra row goes to those who are incapable, not to the capable but unwilling. The community has tremendous resources devoted to providing skills to teens and to adults who lack job or self-employment skills. The opportunity is there, for those who can get away from their home culture, and take it. 

That's fantastic that your community has those things. Mine doesn't, not in the quantity that are needed. I was looking up resources for a friend who is currently homeless, and every place lists a lottery system to get in to see a counselor for career help/medical help/etc. So it could take weeks or months to get help with that. IN the meantime the person has no food, no job, no real ability to get a job as they have no address/phone number to put on an application (we are providing that for my friend), etc. So while they are trying to get in to get help, yes, I will offer them food or money or a place to do laundry or whatever. But again..not the point. It was an anaology comparing the power of those with wealth to the power of those of the dominant race.

 You're asking for people who have power to accomplish 'things' . Are you advocating dictatorship rather than democracy?

um, huh? Last I checked asking people to do something doesn't constitute a dictatorship. It isn't force, it is a request. Besides, some of the best things that can be done are to lobby for better laws, or for better enforcement of existing laws. Like one does in a democracy.

[ktgrok]

Well, anyone who has lived in the world knows that people get defensive when they are told they have an unfair advantage.  Maybe it's time some people here acknowledged *that* fact.

 

Well, fine. It's ok to be uncomfortable. Heck, one SHOULD be uncomfortable. That's what prompts change!!!  People being discriminated against are uncomfortable too. Lets use that discomfort as an impetus for change! That's how adaptation/progress/change works. If one is totally comfortable with the status quo there is no motive for change.

 

I never said I don't have it better than some people because of my skin color.  That's because others are subjected to discrimination by stupid people.  The fact that I am not subjected to the same discrimination as a black person is rather obvious, but why is it about *me* in the first place, especially when  you go on to say I don't owe anyone anything by virtue of my DNA?

 

Maybe a better way of looking at it is that the way white people treat white people should be a "benchmark" of decency.  It is not a privilege, it is what we ALL owe to each other as human beings.

 

By definition, if you enjoy certain benefits that others do not that is a privilege. That's the definition. It SHOULDN"T be a privlege...it is owed everyone, but right now not everyone has it. Therefore, those that DO have those rights, are privileged.

[ktgrok]

Yes, I agree with you on all of the above.  Thank you.  :)

 

 

Here's something that doesn't make sense to me about the concept of white privilege. I'm quoting ktgrok, but could have quoted any number of people who are saying the same thing.

 

"White privilege doesn't mean someone did something wrong."  That may be true for individual encounters between a white person and a person of color, but what keeps white privilege going?  It can't exist in a vacuum.  Something is happening to keep white privilege alive - otherwise it would be going away.  Who or what is responsible?

 

"No "wrongness" implied." To continue the above inquiry, I think most people would answer "who is responsible for keeping white privilege going?" with "white people".  It's the dominant white population segment in certain parts of the world that presumably continues to extend those privileges to itself.  After all, it wouldn't make sense to say that non-white people are actively sustaining white privilege.  The "implied wrongness" is that white people are sustaining white privilege and/or not doing enough to eradicate it.

 

ok, I get your question. The idea is that yes, somewhere out there people, yes, probably white, are orchestrating things so that White Privilege exists. But, that doesn't mean that EVERYONE who is white is to blame. They enjoy the benefits, but they didn't create the problem. Two separate things. I didn't cause myself to be born in the USA, my parents made that happen. But I enjoy the benefits of being a US citizen. Does that make sense?