Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Your answer is not based off the quote in the OP. Read it. It's an accurate definition. It doesn't talk about anyone being better than anyone else. That is your own bias talking, I think.
My own bias is my own opinion. Not anyone else's. That's my perception of the white privilege thing. I grew up in a very mixed race community, so all of my white friends never really talked about "having white privilege". The only ones who bring that kinda stuff up are the white people who grew up in a bubble full of other whites and haven't had much experience around other races.
My own bias is my own opinion. Not anyone else's. That's my perception of the white privilege thing. I grew up in a very mixed race community, so all of my white friends never really talked about "having white privilege". The only ones who bring that kinda stuff up are the white people who grew up in a bubble full of other whites and haven't had much experience around other races.
Exactly. I think there's a big correlation between people who grew up in diverse environments and having actual, normal perceptions of minorities as human beings. I don't treat anyone any less or more based on race, because I actually grew up among people of all kinds. White liberals often met their first minority in college or at work.
White liberals who grew up upper middle class or in their own walled communities tend to view minorities as children or animals who aren't expected to behave, act or have agency over themselves.
White liberals are the worst at initializing non-whites. They take power away from minorities by peddling victim-hood narratives.
I think it exists, but I would expand a bit on the original quote, to clarify things.
A big part of privilege has to do with assumptions, and benefit of the doubt.
If you can get the job or the spot at a top-tier university or the scholarship without anyone wondering if you got it because of affirmative action or some kind of quota system, that's privilege. You are being given the benefit of the doubt.
If you can go to a store and not be followed around because the employees think you are there to shoplift, that's privilege. You are being given the benefit of the doubt.
If you can walk or drive anywhere you want without arousing anyone's suspicion, that's privilege. You are being given the benefit of the doubt.
The first example, particularly regarding jobs, is usually white privilege, sometimes male privilege, particularly if it's a technical field: "How did she get that job, everyone knows men are better at STEM?"
The second two, mostly white privilege, and sometimes age privilege. Nobody suspects Grandma of shoplifting, but people watch teens like hawks.
Hell, I can even think of an example of female privilege. A woman can choose to be a stay-at-home parent and no one blinks an eye, but if a man does it, someone, at some point, will say that he's a bad provider - a deadbeat who isn't taking proper care of his family.
So...yeah, privilege is real. If the terminology offends you, think for a moment about the examples above, and call it by a different name if you like. That doesn't make it any less real.
As for those saying people are blaming privilege for all their misfortunes, I didn't see anything in the original post that even hinted at such a thing.
I think it exists, but I would expand a bit on the original quote, to clarify things.
A big part of privilege has to do with assumptions, and benefit of the doubt.
If you can get the job or the spot at a top-tier university or the scholarship without anyone wondering if you got it because of affirmative action or some kind of quota system, that's privilege. You are being given the benefit of the doubt.
If you can go to a store and not be followed around because the employees think you are there to shoplift, that's privilege. You are being given the benefit of the doubt.
If you can walk or drive anywhere you want without arousing anyone's suspicion, that's privilege. You are being given the benefit of the doubt.
The first example, particularly regarding jobs, is usually white privilege, sometimes male privilege, particularly if it's a technical field: "How did she get that job, everyone knows men are better at STEM?"
The second two, mostly white privilege, and sometimes age privilege. Nobody suspects Grandma of shoplifting, but people watch teens like hawks.
Hell, I can even think of an example of female privilege. A woman can choose to be a stay-at-home parent and no one blinks an eye, but if a man does it, someone, at some point, will say that he's a bad provider - a deadbeat who isn't taking proper care of his family.
So...yeah, privilege is real. If the terminology offends you, think for a moment about the examples above, and call it by a different name if you like. That doesn't make it any less real.
As for those saying people are blaming privilege for all their misfortunes, I didn't see anything in the original post that even hinted at such a thing.
How does any of that allow or prevent someone from getting ahead in the world? Isn't that what the discussion is about?
If someone wants to succeed in life, finish high school, work a fulltime job, and wait until you are 21 and married before you have kids. Doing those 3 things gives one a 75 percent chance of being Middle Class or higher. Only 2 percent of the people who do those three things, live in poverty.
"Being given the benefit of the doubt" is not privilege.
Privilege is getting something extra or above and beyond what you should get. Special treatment. The benefit of the doubt is not special treatment.
What "privilege theory" does is take the spotlight off of disadvantage or discrimination. But that's why you fail. Because you're asking people to self-reflect on something that is NOT special treatment, but simply just the way things should be. Which is why you get push-back. I don't know when this shift occurred (from focusing on minority discrimination to a concept of "white privilege").... but it's pseudo-academic bullsh*t advanced by people who are otherwise unemployable and unable to solve problems in the real world.
What you're basically bitching about is being a minority. Minorities in any society have certain issues compared to a majority population in any particular area. Welcome to planet earth. In the west, there is overwhelming evidence that disadvantage is actually NOT dependent on race or ethnicity. Far many other factors are more important than the racial characteristics of any one individual in determining success, discrimination, etc. Somewhere along the lines people forgot correlation and causation are two different things.
White people shouldn't be called out. They make the best societies to BE a minority. Places where "our" minorities in the West come from make ****TY societies for minorities in countries where their race or ethnicity or religion is the majority. That's the inescapable truth peddlers of "white supremacy" theory can't shake.
"Being given the benefit of the doubt" is not privilege.
Privilege is getting something extra or above and beyond what you should get. Special treatment. The benefit of the doubt is not special treatment.
What "privilege theory" does is take the spotlight off of disadvantage or discrimination. But that's why you fail. Because you're asking people to self-reflect on something that is NOT special treatment, but simply just the way things should be. Which is why you get push-back. I don't know when this shift occurred (from focusing on minority discrimination to a concept of "white privilege").... but it's pseudo-academic bullsh*t advanced by people who are otherwise unemployable and unable to solve problems in the real world.
What you're basically bitching about is being a minority. Minorities in any society have certain issues compared to a majority population in any particular area. Welcome to planet earth. In the west, there is overwhelming evidence that disadvantage is actually NOT dependent on race or ethnicity. There is evidence that far many other factors are more important than the racial characteristics of any one individual.
White people shouldn't be called out. They make the best societies to BE a minority. Places where "our" minorities in the West come from make ****TY societies for minorities in countries where their race or ethnicity or religion is the majority. That's the inescapable truth peddlers of "white supremacy" theory can't shake.
It's about their government. Nothing to do with race.
How does any of that allow or prevent someone from getting ahead in the world? Isn't that what the discussion is about?
If someone wants to succeed in life, finish high school, work a fulltime job, and wait until you are 21 and married before you have kids. Doing those 3 things gives one a 75 percent chance of being Middle Class or higher. Only 2 percent of the people who do those three things, live in poverty.
Unless I am badly mistaken, the discussion is about whether or not white privilege exists - no more and no less. The excerpt in the original post even says explicitly that it's not a question of good or bad outcomes for all members of any group.
I reject the term and I reject the concept. It's meant to assign collective guilt and I only take responsibility for my own individual actions or the actions of those under my direct guardianship.
There seems to be confusion regarding the definition of “privilege” in this context. “White privilege” doesn’t mean that all white people have cush, easy lives and all people of color are born into drugs and poverty. I’ve seen white people who were born into extremely challenging circumstances. On the other hand, I’ve met Latino-Americans who were born with more wealth and social cache. The concept of “white privilege,” however, has nothing to do with the circumstances under which you were born and raise.
White privilege simply states that when you take two people in the exact same situation and circumstances, if one of them is white, that person is usually at an advantage. For example, when applying for jobs, they’ve done studies sending out resumes with everything identical on it… except one person has a “black-sounding” name and one has a “white-sounding” name, and the white person is more likely to get called. If two people are speeding in the exact same vehicle, the person of color is more likely to get pulled over. If two people are walking around a wealthy neighborhood in the exact same outfit on the exact same path, the person of color is more likely to get the cops called on him.
Is this saying white people always get jobs and never get pulled over or arrested? Of course not.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
