(Ranty) DAE feel almost-revulsion any time they hear the word "Privilege" anymore?

submitted by [deleted] from self.GenderCritical

[deleted]

all 26 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]CastleHoward 27 insightful - 3 fun27 insightful - 2 fun28 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

Yes. I do. It's the foundation of critical race theory and it's harming people I care about. White people, Black people, Asian people. They are all in conflict. I have to do everything in secret because everyone is obsessed with privilege and white supremacy and atoning for the sins of colonialism. I'm thinking that I should start a consultancy that removes the woke. First I have to figure out how to do it.

[–]Rationalmind 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I’m surprised the Democratic Party resurrected racism. The party is really going back to its roots.

[–]macaron 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

They think Obama has more privilege than a white person in poverty. It's bonkers. And it's making people more racist, not less.

[–]MarkTwainiac 16 insightful - 1 fun16 insightful - 0 fun17 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

They think Obama has more privilege than a white person in poverty. It's bonkers. And it's making people more racist, not less.

But it sounds like you're saying Obama - former POTUS, world-renowned statesman and ultra famous personality with a personal fortune of $40-70 million - has less or equal "privilege" than a white person in poverty solely based on skin color. Like skin color is the only fact of a person's life that counts.

So having skin color that causes Obama to be seen as black (rather than mixed race) means he's obtained no "privilege" or benefits from his parentage & background, his Ivy League degrees, or all the awards, appointments, accomplishments and high status jobs that he's been been racking up his whole life? He spent 8 years as the most powerful man on planet earth, today in 2020 he's supposedly the "world's most admired man," and he lives a private-jet-set, mansion-dwelling posh life amongst the world's ultra-elites - but it's "bonkers" to think he might have "more privilege than a white person in poverty"?

[–]Rationalmind 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think the wokes would argue that Obama would be even more successful as a white person. That would be wrong.

[–]TheBeefBenson 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Did you mean to put that the other way around?

[–]grixit 18 insightful - 1 fun18 insightful - 0 fun19 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

"Privilege" has been an oppressive concept in the US since the days of segregation, when minorities were encouraged to divide themselves into classes and expect those closer to european features and lifestyle to police those further away. No. Being less oppressed is not the same as privilege.

[–]Feather 20 insightful - 1 fun20 insightful - 0 fun21 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Being less oppressed is not the same as privilege.

That's a good way of putting it.

The word privilege also often draws focus in the wrong direction.

Wrong question: Who is privileged and how, ethically, should they respond to that?

Right question: Who is oppressing others, and what shall we do to stop them?

[–]MonstrousRegiment 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

How many times can I upvote this?

[–]lefterfield 18 insightful - 1 fun18 insightful - 0 fun19 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

The problem is that it's an ok concept in theory, but when applied to an individual it's worse than useless. It's extremely divisive and is only becoming more so every year. If we want to talk about average privilege-based differences across different groups - sure, no problem. But no one should feel obligated to support strangers financially or offer emotional support just because they are "more privileged" according to this theory. It's never going to be accurate on an individual level, because we can't know 100% what someone else is going through. People that I would have expected to have perfect lives occasionally reveal major health issues, fears, or financial problems that I would otherwise have never known about. We can't judge individuals from the outside, knowing only the surface level of what happens in their lives. But yeah, I feel that people often ignore this reality when it comes to privilege theory.

[–]moody_ape 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

YES! exactly! they criticize the group by hating on individuals. and if you claim it's divisive or aything like that, they quickly say you just don't want to acknowledge your privilege.

[–]lefterfield 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, perfect summary of it! I wonder if it's a particularly American problem, because we're so used to thinking in individualistic ways? (And the west, generally) I know that many libfems seem to struggle with the class-based analysis of radical feminism, too. Maybe it's the same problem with both.

[–]artetolife 15 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 0 fun16 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Recognising that some groups of people have advantages that others don't isn't an inherently bad thing, it becomes bad when it's weaponised the way that it is.

[–]buttbuttinator 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The concept of privilege and intersectionality is theoretically a useful concept. The problem is that the people who use the concept the most don't seem to have any interest in actually using them in a sensible, constructive way. They just keep on stacking intersectional identities like that somehow gets to the heart of the issue.

That's how someone can start the day as a straight white male (the most evil identity according to the intersectionalists) and go to bed as a trans lesbian (race tends to fall to the wayside for white trans activists). Nothing about them actually changed, but by saying, "I identify as a lesbian" they suddenly gained two intersectional identities. This entire concept is obviously ridiculous, but we've actually seen this in action with plenty of male feminists who have escaped the consequences of their predatory behavior (eg Charlesotte Clymer).

Another example is my sister acting like she'll be targeted by the cops for being a "fat, queer woman of color". Systemic racism is a problem that really becomes dangerous when it manifests in law enforcement, I'm not denying that. But I don't think that Asian women who exclusively date men are being victimized by police no matter how many intersectional identities they claim.

[–]macaron 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You can basically be privileged in any way, really, since they've stretched out the concept. I think I really began to hate the word, was when I saw that thin privilege was a thing. So basically any ailment that a human could have (only having one leg, depression, colour blindness, etc etc etc), the people who don't have it are privileged. So everyone is 'privileged' on an infinite number of axes.

[–]Cicerosolo 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's a dumb American concept made to reduce the blame on the indofivual for their failure and maximise difference. I remember when sociology actually used to be good...

[–][deleted] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I hear you. I'm a white South African. While the idea of white privilege is questionable in some other parts of the world, here it is irrefutable. We were literally privileged because of our skin colour. However, that was a long time ago now, and with affirmative action (rightly) rectifying the wrongs of the past, and the tiny taxpayer base being squeezed to within an inch of its life, the government having looted everything over the last couple of decades, a crumbling infrastructure and being well on our way to being a failed state, the middle class is joining the poor. South Africa is the most unequal country in the world (Gini index). I work very hard and struggle to make ends meet. But because I'm white, I'm the enemy. The government uses whites as a scapegoat to blame whenever they steal again or do something wrong, to distract the voters.

I'm someone who grew up after 1994, post-democracy, but I and my ilk are evil, privileged land thieves who don't deserve anything we have.

Thanks for letting me rant.

[–]whateverneverpine 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

"However, that was a long time ago now" - no, it isn't. After 100 years maybe?

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You're right, it's not long. But young white kids who were born years after democracy are being guilt-tripped taught that they are privileged on the backs of others. Is that fair to them? There are some awful, racist white South Africans. But most of us just happened to be born here and are trying to live our lives in harmony with others, working hard, being good citizens,,, the apartheid government got into power by the skin of their teeth, and created an authoritarian police state, with censorship and brainwashing propaganda. Dissent was met with stalking, harassment and sometimes murder by their secret police.

They were hated by most right-thinking people. In 1992 there was a referendum to end apartheid and the majority of white South Africans voted to end it.

But we are nonetheless all demonised, called oppressors, colonisers, land thieves, and blamed for all the country's problems. It's short-sighted, absurd. Easy scapegoats.

[–]moody_ape 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Please manage my mental health because you have more spoons.

sorry i laughed hahaha

i agree. the word "privilege" has lost its meaning because it's overused, just like "empowering". people have the right to be angry at the fact they don't have the same privilege, but being angry at individuals who have such privilege is stupid and does absolutely nothing to help and change the situation.

[–]LasagnaRossa 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I've never liked the word privilege to begin with.

If you can cut a queue because of your status, if you're not required to pay taxes because of entity, then yes, you're privileged.

But if a minority has hard life I'm not privileged: they are oppressed.

Privilege is something that needs to get down. Respect is something that everyone needs to achieve.

[–]anonymale 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Liberal privilege checking displaces and prevents class analysis, whether economic- or sex- class. Therefore it should be refused.

[–]PressSnoozeWoke 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Not at all, because it does apply to some people in life. I do hate the term "check your privilege" though.

[–]jet199 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's taken over because the vast majority of people in the West can't honestly look at their lives and say they are oppressed but everyone can find one person who has things better than them.

[–]hmimperialtortie 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well said. Yes, I’m sick to death of that word.

[–]jelliknight 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

"Privilege" has just become a way to knock someone else down. It was supposed to makes us think, it's having the opposite affect. And it applies to everyone. You could be a mixed race transgender lesbian wheelchair-using autistic blind deaf mute with a heroin addition and you'd still have "wasn't in a car accident" privilege.

I read an article about privilege in the animal/evolutionary sense. Privilege is anything your parents give you other than just your existence and genes. So fish don't really get any privilege, they're squirted into a cloud and abandoned. Baby birds have privilege in getting fed for a few weeks before having to fend for themselves. Mammals have milk privilege. Predators which learn skills from their parents have privilege. Any time privilege comes into the equation it means your survival isn't just about how fit YOU are, it's about how much your parents helped you. A tiger cub may be genetically more fit than another but if its parent did a shittier job of teaching it to hunt (because the parent was injured, or died early, or there just wasn't much prey around when it was learning) it will be disadvantaged.

Humans have more privilege than almost any other animal. We invest 18 years, about a quarter of an average human life, in helping our offspring. This means that in humans, unlike fish, your relative success is in a large part nothing to do with you. Your individual skills, achievements and outcomes are still largely driven by your efforts but when comparing a person to another you have to take privilege into account. E.g. You might be great at crochet, that's your achievement, well done. If you're the best in the world at it you have to wonder how many other people had the opportunity to invest so much time in a hobby that's generally unprofitable, and what privilege might've contributed to your relative success?

This is an important concept to understand and recognize. There are genuinely wealthy people who are given businesses as teens and still believe they "did it all themselves" and other people just didn't try as hard.

Of course NONE of this has to do with "checking your privilege" when posting a motivational meme, or with the state of perpetual victim-hood some people are clinging to.

I find a good response to "Check your privilege" is "I did. It's going fine, thanks for asking."